Categorie archief: Divers

Noot 9A/OOM DONALD

[9A]
AD

‘Bevrijdingsdag’ in Amerika: Trump kondigt importtarieven aan, zorgen bij economen

2 APRIL 2025
Woensdag 2 april 2025 zal in de Verenigde Staten de boeken ingaan als bevrijdingsdag, als we Donald Trump mogen geloven. De Amerikaanse president kondigt rond 22.00 uur Nederlandse tijd zogenoemde wederkerige importheffingen aan: heffingen voor goederen uit landen die tarieven hebben op Amerikaanse producten. Het besluit kan desastreuze gevolgen hebben, waarschuwen economen.
De maatregel moet volgens Trump een einde maken aan oneerlijke handelspraktijken voor de VS en gaan gelden voor alle landen en sectoren. Volgens het Witte Huis zullen die heffingen per direct ingaan.

Hoe hoog de tarieven zullen zijn, is nog niet bekend. Daarover is de afgelopen dagen onderhandeld. Dinsdag meldde de Amerikaanse krant The Washington Post op basis van ingewijden dat de heffingen waarschijnlijk 20 procent bedragen. Donald Trump zei dat hij genadig zou zijn bij het doorvoeren van maatregelen. ,,Relatief gezien zullen we erg vriendelijk zijn”, aldus de president.

Eerder al heffingen op staal, aluminium en auto’s

Trump beloofde afgelopen weekend dat hij woensdag een groot plan zou onthullen, een dag die hij als ‘Liberation Day’ (Bevrijdingsdag, red.) betitelde. Het gaat daarbij om zogenaamde wederkerige tarieven: heffingen tegen landen die als reactie op eerdere Amerikaanse handelsmaatregelen eigen invoertarieven op Amerikaanse producten hebben ingevoerd. De Verenigde Staten kondigden eerder al een importtarief van 25 procent af voor buitenlands staal, aluminium en auto’s. Ook voor Chinese goederen werden hoge importtarieven aangekondigd.

Als gevolg van die heffingen zagen de Europese autobouwers BMW en Volkswagen hun verkoop in de Verenigde Staten in de eerste drie maanden van het jaar duidelijk stijgen. De verkoop van VW’s steeg meer dan 7 procent in de VS, en BMW verkocht in die periode 3,7 procent meer auto’s. Voor beide merken is de Amerikaanse markt erg belangrijk.

Trump en zijn regering zijn ervan overtuigd dat de tarieven de Amerikaanse economie een boost zullen geven. Zijn economische adviseurs verwachten dat de tarieven 600 miljard dollar (ruim 555 miljard euro, red.) per jaar zullen opleveren. Dat zou de grootste belastingwinst sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog zijn. Ook zal de landelijke productie volgens de regering groeien en zullen er veel banen ontstaan bij fabrieken. ,,De president heeft een geweldig team van adviseurs die hier al decennia onderzoek naar doen. Zij zitten er niet naast. We richten ons op het herstellen van de gouden eeuw van Amerika, we willen het land weer een superkracht qua productie maken”, zei persvoorlichter van het Witte Huis dinsdag.

Minister van Financiën Scott Bessent suggereerde dat de tarieven onderhandelbaar kunnen zijn, maar het Witte Huis heeft nog geen definitieve details vrijgegeven.

‘Tot 4200 dollar extra per huishouden’

Critici waarschuwen ondertussen dat de Amerikaanse economie door de maatregel juist kan krimpen en dat prijzen voor kleding, brandstof, auto’s, woningen en levensmiddelen kunnen stijgen. Volgens schattingen van de Yale University zou een invoerheffing van 20 procent het gemiddelde Amerikaanse huishouden tussen de 3400 en 4200 dollar extra per jaar kosten. Ter vergelijking: in de Verenigde Staten is het modale salaris iets meer dan 5000 dollar per maand.

Democraat Chuck Schumer beweert dat Trump de tarieven gebruikt om belastingverlagingen voor de rijken te bekostigen. Ook binnen de Republikeinse partij zijn er twijfels. Huisvoorzitter Mike Johnson erkende dat de eerste effecten ‘robuust’ kunnen zijn, maar zei te hopen dat de strategie uiteindelijk positief zal uitpakken.

Wereldwijd worden de ontwikkelingen met spanning gevolgd. Internationale handelspartners zijn al bezig met tegenmaatregelen. Canada heeft eerder al gereageerd met importheffingen als vergelding voor de Amerikaanse staal- en aluminiumtarieven, en de EU heeft aangekondigd dat het 28 miljard dollar (zo’n 26 miljard euro) aan Amerikaanse goederen extra zal belasten.

Dinsdag liet voorzitter van de Europese Commissie Ursula von der Leyen zich kritisch uit over het plan van Trump. Ze zei te begrijpen dat Amerika zijn eigen industrie wil beschermen, maar zei dat algehele tarieven ‘dingen slechter maken, niet beter’. ,,Tarieven zullen alleen maar inflatie aanjagen”, zei Von der Leyen. ,,Dit gaat banen kosten”, waarschuwde ze.

Von der Leyen benadrukt dat de EU open blijft staan voor onderhandelingen met de VS, maar dat ze ook bereid is tegenmaatregelen te nemen. ,,Laat me duidelijk zijn, Europa is deze confrontatie niet gestart. We willen niet per se terugslaan, maar we hebben een sterk plan klaarliggen om dat te doen als het nodig is”, zei de politica.

Euraziatisch overleg in Vietnam

Vietnam, dat sterk afhankelijk is van internationale handel, plant alvast topoverleg met China en de Europese Unie. Daarbij zijn medio april bezoeken aan Vietnam gepland door de Chinese president Xi Jinping en Europese leiders, aldus regeringsfunctionarissen.

Ook Eurocommissaris Maroš Šefčovič (Handel) en Europees Commissievoorzitter Ursula von der Leyen zijn van plan binnenkort naar Vietnam af te reizen, net als de Franse president Emmanuel Macron. Von der Leyen sprak onlangs via een videoverbinding een top in Hanoi toe van Asean, het economische samenwerkingsverband van Zuidoost-Aziatische landen. Ze verklaarde dat er nieuwe mogelijkheden voor handel en investeringen moeten worden gecreëerd tussen de EU en de Asean-landen. Volgens haar zijn dit betrouwbare partners.

Vietnam heeft al verschillende maatregelen genomen om het hoge handelsoverschot met de VS tegen te gaan. Zo zijn heffingen op een reeks Amerikaanse goederen verlaagd, waaronder voor voertuigen, vloeibaar gemaakt aardgas en landbouwproducten. Ook heeft Vietnam beloofd meer goederen van de VS te kopen.

EINDE

RTLZ

President Brazilië haalt fel uit naar Trump, noemt heffing ‘onaanvaardbare chantage’

18 JULI 2025
De Braziliaanse president Lula da Silva heeft stevig uitgehaald naar de Amerikaanse president Trump na zijn dreigement om Brazilië een importheffing van 50 procent op te leggen. Lula noemt die heffing ‘onaanvaardbare chantage’ en zegt ook ‘geen bevelen’ van Trump te zullen volgen. Hij bijt daarmee – in tegenstelling tot leiders van andere landen die heffingen opgelegd krijgen – fel van zich af.
In een televisietoespraak zei Lula dat Brazilië al enige tijd met de VS onderhandelt over handelstarieven en, dat het Zuid-Amerikaanse land al in mei een voorstel heeft ingediend.

“We hadden een reactie verwacht, en wat we kregen was onaanvaardbare chantage, in de vorm van bedreigingen aan het adres van Braziliaanse instellingen en valse informatie over de handel tussen Brazilië en de Verenigde Staten”, zei Lula.

Trump kondigde vorige week in een brief een nieuwe importheffing van 50 procent aan op alle Braziliaanse goederen die ingaat per 1 augustus. De heffing tegen Brazilië is een van de hoogste tarieven die Trump heeft aangekondigd in zijn voortdurende handelsoorlog tegen zo’n beetje alle Amerikaanse handelspartners die volgens hem misbruik maken van de VS.

Trump uit in diezelfde brief stevige kritiek op de Braziliaanse autoriteiten om het proces tegen zijn bondgenoot, en oud-president van Brazilië, Jair Bolsonaro die terechtstaat voor een poging tot een staatsgreep in 2023.

Geen bevelen

“Geen enkele buitenlander zal deze president bevelen geven”, zei Lula in zijn toespraak. Daarin gebruikte hij ook het woord ‘gringo’, een informele en soms neerbuigende term die in Latijns-Amerikaanse landen wordt gebruikt om te verwijzen naar buitenlanders.

De Braziliaanse regering is momenteel in gesprek met brancheorganisaties en bedrijven die door het torenhoge Amerikaanse tarief getroffen zullen worden, en zegt eventuele tegenmaatregelen voor te bereiden voor als de gesprekken met de VS mislukken.

Nationalistische campagne

Ook op een andere vlakken dreigen de twee landen te botsen. Lula zei deze week tijdens een andere toespraak voor studenten dat Brazilië ook doorgaat met de plannen voor regulering en belastingheffing van Amerikaanse techbedrijven. Hij noemde hun diensten, zoals sociale media, ‘kanalen van geweld en nepnieuws die zijn vermomd als vrijheid van meningsuiting’.

Lula en zijn regerende Arbeiderspartij (PT) lijken volgens analisten het handelsconflict met de VS aan te grijpen om in eigen land een nationalistische campagne te voeren. Die moet de dalende populariteit van de linkse politicus versterken met oog op de verkiezingen van volgend jaar.

EINDE

NOS

‘Trump bemoeit zich door heffingen met Braziliaanse politiek en justitie’

1 AUGUSTUS 2025

In Brazilië zijn de zorgen groot na invoering van importheffingen van 50 procent door de Amerikaanse president Trump. Hoewel er een lijst is van bijna zevenhonderd producten die op de valreep werden vrijgesteld, waaronder sinaasappelsap, olie en vliegtuigen, zijn de gevolgen van de heffingen voor de Braziliaanse economie groot.

Zo zal de export van rundvlees, meubels, vruchten zoals mango’s en vooral koffie veel duurder worden. Brazilië is de grootste koffieproducent ter wereld en goed voor 30 procent van de koffie in Amerika.

Koffieboeren hadden het afgelopen jaar grote moeilijkheden door de grote droogte en klimaatverandering. Door de heffingen worden hun problemen nog groter, verwacht politicoloog Pablo Ibanez: “Wij zullen dat merken, maar de Amerikanen ook, want de koffie wordt daar duurder. Het is niet de verwachting dat bijvoorbeeld Colombia snel zoveel koffie als Brazilië kan produceren, dus uiteindelijk zijn er alleen maar verliezers.”

Straffen

De VS exporteert meer naar Brazilië dan het importeert. Er is een handelsoverschot van meer dan zeven miljard dollar. De heffingen hebben dan ook vooral een politieke reden: Trump wil Brazilië straffen. Hij eist dat de rechtszaak tegen de extreemrechtse ex-president Jair Bolsonaro, zijn politieke vriend en bondgenoot, wordt stopgezet.

Bolsonaro staat onder meer terecht voor het beramen van een staatsgreep na de verkiezingen van 2022, die hij nipt verloor van de huidige president Lula da Silva. Ook wordt Bolsonaro gezien als de aanstichter van de bestorming van het parlement en het hooggerechtshof door zijn aanhangers in januari 2023.

Dat Trump zich mengt in de Braziliaanse interne politiek, vooral in justitiële zaken, is een aanval en een directe bedreiging voor onze soevereiniteit.

Pablo Ibanez, politicoloog

Trump legde ook sancties op aan rechter Alexandre de Moraes van het hooggerechtshof, die de onderzoeken en de zaken tegen Bolsonaro opende. Inmiddels is het visum voor de VS van de rechter ingetrokken en worden mogelijke tegoeden en bezittingen van hem bevroren.

De Moraes wordt er door Trump van beticht “ernstige mensenrechtenschendingen” te plegen door zich te richten op politici van de (rechtse) oppositie, onder wie journalisten, kranten en Amerikaanse en internationale bedrijven, zoals sociale mediaplatforms. Eerder noemde Trump de vervolging van Bolsonaro een ‘heksenjacht’.

Braziliaanse experts spreken van een ongekende situatie en een aanval op de democratie. “Dat Trump zich mengt in de Braziliaanse interne politiek, vooral in justitiële zaken, is een aanval en een directe bedreiging voor onze soevereiniteit. Hij eist dat Lula gaat ingrijpen in het hooggerechtshof, maar dat zou betekenen dat er hier een dictatuur gevestigd wordt. Want al zou Lula dat willen, hij heeft die bevoegdheid niet”, zegt Ibanez, die benadrukt dat Brazilië een duidelijke scheiding der machten kent die goed functioneert.

Zoon van Bolsonaro

Op de achtergrond van de crisis speelt Bolsonaro’s zoon en parlementslid Eduardo Bolsonaro een belangrijke rol. Hij vertrok dit jaar voor onbepaalde tijd naar Amerika, naar eigen zeggen om te ontkomen aan vervolging door justitie.

Hij staat in nauw contact met Trump, begeeft zich in ultrarechtse kringen en probeert de zaak tegen zijn vader een andere kant op de sturen. Na de bekendmaking door Trump over de 50 procent tariefsverhoging reageerde hij enthousiast op sociale media.

In Brazilië worden de Bolsonaros inmiddels steeds sterker bekritiseerd. Ze verliezen steun, in tegenstelling tot president Lula da Silva die juist populairder lijkt te worden. Uit onderzoek blijkt dat een meerderheid van de Brazilianen, 57 procent, fel tegen de importheffingen is, want veel mensen gaat de bemoeienis van Trump veel te ver.

Amerikaanse macht

Trump raakt ook een andere gevoelige snaar in Brazilië. Het land werd in 1985 weer een democratie, na ruim twintig jaar militaire dictatuur. Het waren in 1964 de Amerikanen die de militairen bij een staatsgreep in het zadel hielpen.

Ook nu lijkt de VS onder Trump uit te zijn op een ‘regime change‘. Washington probeert te bewerkstelligen dat Bolsonaro kan meedoen met de volgende verkiezingen.

In een interview met The New York Times maakte president Lula da Silva duidelijk dat er niet te onderhandelen valt over de soevereiniteit van zijn land en sprak hij zijn zorgen uit: “Wij kennen de economische macht van de Verenigde Staten en we erkennen de militaire macht en de technologische kracht van de VS. Dat maakt ons niet bang, het maakt ons bezorgd.”

EINDE

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 9A/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noten 8 en 9/OOM DONALD

[8]
WIKIPEDIA
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
WIKIPEDIA
PROJECT 2025
[9]
WIKIPEDIA
IMPORTHEFFINGEN VAN DE REGERING TRUMP II
AD

China slaat terug: extra heffingen van 34 procent op alle Amerikaanse import

4 APRIL 2025
China heeft gereageerd op de onlangs door Donald Trump aangekondigde wederkerige tarieven. Beijing kondigde vrijdag extra invoerheffingen van 34 procent aan op goederen die het land importeert uit de Verenigde Staten. Daarmee escaleert de handelsoorlog verder.
De Amerikaanse president presenteerde eerder deze week tijdens een persmoment de hoogte van de wederkerige tarieven die hij in gaat voeren. Dat zijn heffingen tegen landen die als reactie op eerdere Amerikaanse handelsmaatregelen eigen invoertarieven op Amerikaanse producten hebben ingevoerd.

Voor Chinese goederen bedraagt het tarief 34 procent. Gecombineerd met eerdere heffingen – Trump kondigde eerder al hoge tarieven aan voor Chinese goederen – steeg de importbelasting voor producten uit China in de VS daardoor naar 54 procent. Daarmee wordt het land strenger getarifeerd dan bijvoorbeeld Europa.

De maatregel moet volgens Trump een einde maken aan oneerlijke handelspraktijken voor de VS en gaan gelden voor alle landen en sectoren.

‘Handelsoorlog kent geen winnaar’

De Chinese overheid verklaarde kort na Trumps aankondigingen al ‘tegenmaatregelen te nemen om zijn eigen rechten en belangen te beschermen’. ‘Een handelsoorlog kent geen winnaar, en voor protectionisme bestaat geen uitweg’, voegde het Chinese ministerie van Handel daar toen ook aan toe.

Chinese autoriteiten kondigden ook een onderzoek aan naar medische CT-scanners uit de VS en India. Verder zet China de invoer van pluimveeproducten van twee Amerikaanse bedrijven stop.

Als reactie daalde de AEX-index op het Damrak opnieuw diep in het rood. De Amsterdamse hoofdindex verloor zo’n 3 procent. Staalconcern ArcelorMittal, dat erg gevoelig is voor importtarieven, kelderde maar liefst bijna 10 procent. Ook ABN Amro en ING gingen hard omlaag met minnen van ruim 8 procent. Chipbedrijven Asmi, Besi en ASML leverden tot 7,7 procent in.

Verkoopgolf op Wall Street

De aandelenbeurzen in New York werden vrijdag opnieuw overspoeld door een verkoopgolf. Beleggers dumpten hun aandelen nadat China had aangekondigd terug te slaan in de handelsoorlog met de VS.

De Dow-Jonesindex noteerde kort na opening van de markt 2,5 procent lager. De Amerikaanse beursgraadmeters zakten donderdag al tot 6 procent en leden daarmee de grootste verliezen sinds 2020.

Europa zoekt toenadering

De relatie tussen Washington en Beijing lijkt verslechterd sinds Trump in januari terugkeerde in het Witte Huis. Kenners vinden het opvallend dat de Amerikaanse president meer dan twee maanden na zijn inauguratie nog niet heeft gesproken met zijn Chinese ambtgenoot.

Europa werkt op de achtergrond juist aan het aanhalen van de banden met China. Medio april brengen de Chinese president Xi Jinping en Europese leiders, waaronder Eurocommissaris Maroš Šefčovič (Handel), Europees Commissievoorzitter Ursula von der Leyen en de Franse president Emmanuel Macron, een bezoek aan Vietnam om over handel te praten.

Von der Leyen sprak onlangs via een videoverbinding een top in Hanoi toe van Asean, het economische samenwerkingsverband van Zuidoost-Aziatische landen. Ze verklaarde dat er nieuwe mogelijkheden voor handel en investeringen moeten worden gecreëerd tussen de EU en de Asean-landen. Volgens haar zijn dit betrouwbare partners.

EINDE

AD

Trump kondigt invoertarieven van 20 procent aan voor goederen uit EU

3 APRIL 2025
Donald Trump heeft woensdagavond (Nederlandse tijd) heffingen van 20 procent aangekondigd op goederen uit de Europese Unie. Dat deed hij vanuit dRozentuin van het Witte Huis tijdens een persmoment.
Het gaat daarbij om zogenaamde wederkerige tarieven: heffingen tegen landen die als reactie op eerdere Amerikaanse handelsmaatregelen eigen invoertarieven op Amerikaanse producten hebben ingevoerd.

Volgens hem komen Europese handelsbarrières neer op een heffing van 39 procent voor goederen uit de Verenigde Staten, die de Amerikanen vergelden met een ‘wederkerige’ heffing die de helft van dat tarief bedraagt.

Zo bedragen de heffingen op goederen uit het Verenigd Koninkrijk 10 procent, voor Chinese goederen 34 procent, voor Zuid-Afrika 30 procent, voor Zwitserland 31 procent, voor Taiwan 32 procent en voor Vietnam 46 procent. Singapore en Brazilië betalen elk ook 10 procent extra bij export van hun goederen naar de VS.

De maatregel moet volgens Trump een einde maken aan oneerlijke handelspraktijken voor de VS en gaan gelden voor alle landen en sectoren. Een functionaris van het Witte Huis zei dat het tarief van 10 procent in de vroege ochtend van 5 april in zou gaan en dat het extra tarief voor de ergste overtreders op 9 april zou ingaan.

Gouden Eeuw

Hij beschuldigde andere landen ervan de VS te hebben ‘geplunderd’, ‘beroofd’ en ‘verkracht’ en zo rijk te zijn geworden ten koste van Amerikanen. Hij beloofde de Amerikaanse industrie razendsnel op te bouwen en handelsbarrières van andere landen af te breken met de nieuwe importheffingen. ,,Dit wordt de gouden eeuw van Amerika”, zei Trump, die zijn toehoorders biljoenen aan belastinginkomsten in het vooruitzicht stelde dankzij de heffingen.

De Verenigde Staten kondigden eerder al een importtarief van 25 procent af voor buitenlands staal, aluminium en auto’s. Ook voor Chinese goederen werden hoge importtarieven aangekondigd. Veel landen reageerden daarop met tarieven voor goederen uit de VS.

Bevrijdingsdag

Trump kondigde afgelopen weekend al aan dat hij de heffingen zou doorvoeren, op wat hij ‘Liberation Day’ (Bevrijdingsdag, red.) noemde. Hoe hoog de tarieven zullen zijn, was echter nog niet bekend. Daarover is de afgelopen dagen onderhandeld. Dinsdag meldde de Amerikaanse krant The Washington Post dinsdag op basis van ingewijden dat de heffingen waarschijnlijk 20 procent zouden bedragen.

Eerder zei Trump dat hij genadig zou zijn bij het doorvoeren van maatregelen. ,,Relatief gezien zullen we erg vriendelijk zijn”, aldus de president.

Handelspartners bereiden maatregelen voor

Wereldwijd werden de ontwikkelingen met spanning gevolgd. Internationale handelspartners bereidden de afgelopen dagen al tegenmaatregelen voor. Dinsdag liet voorzitter van de Europese Commissie Ursula von der Leyen zich kritisch uit over het plan van Trump. Ze zei te begrijpen dat Amerika zijn eigen industrie wil beschermen, maar zei dat algehele tarieven ‘dingen slechter maken, niet beter’. ,,Tarieven zullen alleen maar inflatie aanjagen”, zei Von der Leyen. ,,Dit gaat banen kosten”, waarschuwde ze.

Von der Leyen benadrukt dat de EU open blijft staan voor onderhandelingen met de VS, maar dat ze ook bereid is tegenmaatregelen te nemen. ,,Laat me duidelijk zijn, Europa is deze confrontatie niet gestart. We willen niet per se terugslaan, maar we hebben een sterk plan klaarliggen om dat te doen als het nodig is”, zei de politica.
EINDE

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noten 8 en 9/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 7/OOM DONALD

[7]

Examples of the impact of USAID cuts

Aid cuts will most severely affect people enduring conflict and dire emergencies, and where people are suffering in the worst forms of poverty. Within that group, women and children are always the most affected. Many people displaced by conflict and disasters will face unacceptably high risks of water-borne diseases (such as cholera) in refugee camps and informal settlements. With no support for childhood immunizations and maternal health programs, mothers and children will be at a higher risk of preventable diseases.

We have seen the human impact of cutting USAID in places, such as Ukraine, Yemen, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Syria, and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

OXFAM AMERICA

What USAID did, and the effects of Trump’s cuts on lifesaving aid

6 NOVEMBER 2025
Oxfam outlines what the U.S. Agency for International Development did and the real-life effects of USAID cuts.

U.S. foreign aid has long played a critical role in tackling poverty, hunger, and inequality worldwide, which is why the Trump administration’s recent cuts were met with public outrage and pushback from development and humanitarian organizations, including Oxfam.

Despite widespread public support for U.S.-funded foreign aid, the Trump administration has shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) , which funded the majority of U.S. humanitarian and development assistance worldwide to people in some of the worst crises. The effect of these cuts on people is dire: At least 23 million children stand to lose access to education, and as many as 95 million people would lose access to basic healthcare, potentially leading to more than 3 million preventable deaths per year.

Oxfam has responded to the closure of USAID by joining other groups in a lawsuit to defend USAID and U.S. foreign assistance, which is ongoing.

So what does the Trump administration’s decision to eliminate so much foreign aid mean, what impact could it have around the world, and why is it critical for the government to reverse this decision? Oxfam answers all of these questions and more.

What was USAID and what did it do?

 

USAID facilitated much of the humanitarian and foreign development assistance of the U.S. government during the decades since it was established in 1961. USAID brought lifesaving medicines, food, clean water, assistance for farmers, kept women and girls safe, and promoted peace—all for less than one percent of our federal budget.

“There is not a single area of development and humanitarian assistance USAID has not been involved in,” said Oxfam America’s President and CEO Abby Maxman, who has been working in international development for 30 years. “People at USAID have been thought leaders implementing ideas at scale, in wide ranging areas — I don’t think there is a major area of the development system in which USAID did not bring its technical know-how, research, and evidence.”

Foreign aid programs help people around the world in various ways, providing food, healthcare, education, economic development, and disaster relief. It’s a key part of U.S. foreign policy and has proven to be an important factor in reducing global poverty. This type of assistance—from the United States as well as other governments and international institutions—has saved millions of lives.

How much aid does the U.S. give to foreign countries?

The United States used to spend around one percent of the federal budget on foreign development assistance, which includes both humanitarian assistance and development programs.

The agency that was overseeing much of U.S. foreign aid was USAID, which had a budget of $63 billion in 2023. The exact amount of aid carried out by USAID varied from year to year, but until 2025 it has been less than one percent of the federal budget, which worked out to about $105 per U.S. citizen per year.

Which countries have been impacted by the USAID closure?

The impacts of the USAID closure are being felt all around the world. In 2024, USAID was providing assistance to about 130 countries. Countries that needed lifesaving aid the most are experiencing the worst of the cuts, including Ukraine, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, and Syria, to name only a few.

Why shutting down USAID was widely unsupported

The Trump administration has presented the cutting of foreign assistance funding and the elimination of USAID as ways of reducing government spending. Its day-1 executive order indicated that such assistance is “not aligned with American interests and in many cases antithetical to American values.” Later decisions to pull back foreign assistance funding that had already been approved by Congress also cited “waste, fraud and abuse.

Oxfam America wanted to investigate Americans’ views on foreign aid and launched two waves of national opinion polling in February and May 2025.

What we learned was clear: The American public rejects Trump’s extreme cuts to lifesaving and development aid. More specifically:

  • Two out of three Americans, including nearly half of Republicans, do not support the 85 percent cut to U.S. aid programs enacted by Secretary of State Rubio and the Trump administration in March—cuts that have been formalized in the president’s FY26 budget proposal and reflected in the $8 billion cuts included in the foreign aid rescissions package.
  • When asked how much would be appropriate for the U.S. to invest in foreign aid, more than 95 percent of respondents identified an amount higher than the administration’s current budget.
  • More than three in four Americans signaled support for food assistance, water and sanitation, and disaster and medical relief programs.

These details dive deeper into the popular perceptions of foreign aid—beginning with widespread opposition to drastic aid reductions.

What are some examples of how USAID has helped people?

USAID’s work abroad covered many regions and issues including HIV prevention, the humanitarian crisis in Congo, war relief in Ukraine, among numerous others.

One of the more effective efforts funded by USAID over the last 50 years was in the area of maternal and child health (MCH). Since 1990 the number of children under the age of five dying has dropped by half, and 90 countries saw their rate of under-five mortality drop by two thirds during the same period. Just from 2020 until 2023, annual maternal deaths fell by 40 percent. Despite the fact that USAID programs have helped contribute to the tremendous progress in this area of public health in poor countries, recent cuts to USAID awards include 86 percent of the MCH projects.

Another program, which has saved the lives of millions, is the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Since 2003, the program has saved over 25 million lives, prevented millions of HIV infections, and supported countries in HIV epidemic control. The program has been incredibly successful in increasing HIV testing, providing lifesaving treatment, and improving health systems around the world. Now, under the aid freeze, PEPFAR’s future is under threat, potentially leaving more than 20 million people – including 500,000 children – at risk without adequate HIV treatment and services.

“In Côte d’Ivoire, 70 percent of antiretroviral medication in the country, on which people living with HIV and AIDS depend, is provided through PEPFAR,” Maxman says she learned in a meeting with country partners in early February. “If we cut off the program, literally 70 percent of the people living with HIV will lose their treatment. The uncertainty this introduces is cruel.”

Examples of the impact of USAID cuts

Aid cuts will most severely affect people enduring conflict and dire emergencies, and where people are suffering in the worst forms of poverty. Within that group, women and children are always the most affected. Many people displaced by conflict and disasters will face unacceptably high risks of water-borne diseases (such as cholera) in refugee camps and informal settlements. With no support for childhood immunizations and maternal health programs, mothers and children will be at a higher risk of preventable diseases.

We have seen the human impact of cutting USAID in places, such as Ukraine, Yemen, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Syria, and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Following a 7.7 magnitude earthquake in Myanmar in late March, Oxfam’s President and CEO Abby Maxman pointed out that shutting down USAID meants that the “U.S. government’s ability to respond to the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar and future crises is severely compromised. Speed, collaboration, and resources are life and death matters when disaster strikes. The illegal decision to dismantle USAID means the U.S. will be unable to show up as it has in past emergencies.”

Beyond the halt in development assistance around the world, humanitarian aid workers in war zones are experiencing the immediate impact of cutting off so much of U.S. foreign disaster assistance.

For example, the administration’s order to pause all foreign development assistance occurred while hundreds of thousands of people in eastern areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo were fleeing violence, with many gathering in the city of Goma, where local water and sanitation infrastructure cannot meet their needs.

Many aid organizations funded by USAID were forced to immediately stop essential work–like providing clean water in Goma–which has lead to people sourcing water from Lake Kivu.This increases the likelihood of cholera, according to Camara Wabomundu, the agent in charge of infectious diseases and water, sanitation, and hygiene at the Buhimba Health Center in Goma.

“Suddenly everything collapsed; neither the hospital nor the communities were prepared for this sudden stop,” Wabomundo said, noting that his health center is left without the resources they need to avoid a cholera epidemic. “I fear that cholera will exterminate this population; they have survived the bombardments, but cutting off assistance could lead to more deaths than the war,” he said.

Cutting these types of initiatives may serve only to prolong a country’s path out of poverty. Maxman said in a press release in January that eliminating the work of USAID and U.S. foreign assistance “would be cruel, intentionally harmful and directly at odds with U.S. interests.”

 

How is Oxfam advocating and campaigning for humanitarian funding?

In addition to bringing the Trump administration to court to defend USAID, here’s how Oxfam America is also working in the United States to bring attention to the negative effects of these sudden and poorly considered policy changes.

Discussions with policy makers in Washington D.C.: Oxfam staff, in collaboration with Oxfam supporters and representatives of civil society organizations directly affected by the international aid cuts, have met with Congressional and State Department staff to advocate for humanitarian assistance funds that can help people in Ukraine, Syria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and other countries experiencing conflict and poverty.

Aliona Pashchenko works for The Tenth of April organization in Ukraine, and she came to Washington, D.C., and joined with Oxfam to meet with members of Congress and report on the chaotic effects of the aid cuts. The Tenth of April helps people in Ukraine who are displaced by conflict, and Oxfam is one of their supporters.

Pashchenko explained that the sudden pause and eventual cuts in support from USAID will have long-term effects in her country. “The humanitarian funding pause didn’t just delay aid,” she said in a story published by DEVEX. “It fractured the foundation of how humanitarian support functions.”

Oxfam supporters take action: As part of Oxfam’s advocacy efforts in Washington, D.C., 100 Oxfam Action Network volunteers and Sisters on the Planet Ambassadors (a group of influential women leaders committed to fighting inequality) held 130 meetings on Capitol Hill in March, urging members of Congress to invest in humanitarian aid and economic policies that have the greatest impact on women and girls.

Oxfam is calling on its supporters to sign a petition asking Secretary of State Marco Rubio and members of Congress protect U.S. humanitarian and development assistance. So far, more than 37,000 people have signed the online petition, and thousands of others have sent email messages and made phone calls to members of Congress asking for support for humanitarian aid and long-term development assistance.

 

How you can help

Call your senators: Congress can and must fight back against this illegal action. Call 1-866-374-0409 now. We’ll give you a quick and easy message to share with your senators and then connect you directly to their offices. If you get voicemail, leave a message. More than 1,000 Oxfam supporters have already made calls and we’re hearing from Senate offices that they are making a real impact – make your call today.

Sign our petition protecting lifesaving aid: Humanitarian assistance is an essential part of U.S. foreign policy and has proven to be a key factor in reducing global poverty. By investing in critical programs that provide food, health care, education, economic development, and disaster relief, the U.S. saves lives, supports marginalized communities, and promotes global stability.

END

BBC

‘People will starve’ because of US aid cut to Sudan

25 FEBRUARY 2025

The freezing of US humanitarian assistance has forced the closure of almost 80% of the emergency food kitchens set up to help people left destitute by Sudan’s civil war, the BBC has learned.

Aid volunteers said the impact of President Donald Trump’s executive order halting contributions from the US government’s development organisation (USAID) for 90 days meant more than 1,100 communal kitchens had shut.

It is estimated that nearly two million people struggling to survive have been affected.

The conflict between the army and paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has killed tens of thousands of people, forced millions from their homes and left many facing famine since it erupted in April 2023.

The kitchens are run by groups known as emergency response rooms, a grassroots network of activists who stayed on the frontlines to respond to the crises in their neighbourhoods.

“People are knocking on the volunteers’ doors,” says Duaa Tariq, one of the emergency room organisers. “People are screaming from hunger in the streets.”

The Trump administration abruptly suspended all US aid last month to determine whether it was “serving US interests”, and moved to begin dismantling USAID.

The State Department has issued an exemption for emergency food assistance, but Sudanese groups and others say there is significant confusion and uncertainty about what that means in practice.

The normal channels for processing a waiver through USAID no longer exist, and it is not clear if cash assistance – on which the communal kitchens depend – will be restored, or only goods in-kind. According to some estimates, USAID provided 70-80% of the total funding to these flexible cash programmes.

The closure of the majority of Sudan’s emergency kitchens is being seen as a significant setback by organisations working to tackle the world’s largest hunger crisis, with famine conditions reported in at least five locations.

The network of communal feeding centres relied in the early stages of the country’s civil war on community and diaspora donations but later became a focal point for funding from international agencies struggling to access the conflict zones, including USAID.

It is a “huge setback” says Andrea Tracy, a former USAID official who has set up a fund, the Mutual Aid Sudan Coalition, for private donations to the emergency rooms.

 

 

The former head of USAID, Samantha Power, had embraced the idea of working with the local groups rather than relying only on traditional channels like the UN.

Money had started to flow through international aid organisations that got US grants, but a channel for direct funding was in the works.

“It was ground-breaking,” says Ms Tracy. “The only time that USAID had ever done this was with the White Helmets [humanitarian group] in Syria.”

For Ms Tariq, the cut in US funding made it impossible to buy stock for the more than 25 kitchens in the six neighbourhoods in the capital, Khartoum, she helps to service. She told the BBC that left them unprepared for a worsening situation as the army advanced on the area, which has been held by the RSF since the conflict broke out.

There was widespread looting of markets as the RSF began to withdraw and the army tightened its siege.

Most of the kitchens had closed, she said. Some are trying to get food on credit from local fishermen and farmers, but very soon “we expect to see a lot of people starving”.

Here and in the rest of the country, Ms Tracy’s Mutual Aid Sudan Coalition fund will do what it can to plug the gap left by USAID.

“I think we can shore up [the emergency kitchens],” she said, “but the reality is that [private donations] are going to have to do even more now, because even if humanitarian assistance resumes, it’s never going to be what it was.”

“These volunteers were challenging us to work differently, and we were responding,” says a member of a former USAID partner organisation.

They are “exhausted, traumatised and underfunded” and “we were scaling up to help them”.

The State Department did not answer specific questions about waivers for Sudan, saying that information was shared directly with groups whose applications were successful.

“The aid review process is not about ending foreign aid, but restructuring assistance to ensure it makes the United States safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” it said in response to a BBC query.

The UN World Food Programme (WFP) says it has received waivers for its 13 existing Sudanese grants with USAID, but there is no certainty about what comes next for future funding. That would anyway have been under negotiation – now the talks will take place in changed circumstances.

In 2024 the US was the largest single donor to Sudan, both in direct donations and in contributions to the UN’s Sudan Humanitarian Response Plan.

Top UN officials told the BBC the impact of Washington’s policy shift would be felt beyond the borders of Sudan, with more than two million civilians now refugees in neighbouring countries.

“I witnessed people who have fled conflict but not hunger,” said Rania Dagesh, the WFP’s assistant executive director for partnerships and innovation, after visiting camps in Renk and Malakal, South Sudan, earlier this month.

The influx of refugees has only strained available meagre resources further.

“We have to rationalise, rationalise, rationalise,” says Mamadou Dian Balde, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees’ regional bureau director.

He had also been to visit refugee camps in Chad and Egypt when he spoke to the BBC. “We are strained. It’s extremely difficult.”

They both credit the local communities for welcoming those seeking refuge and sharing with them the little that is available. In the case of South Sudan, “it is a million extra people who’ve come in to a country where already 60% of the population is in emergency hunger”, says Ms Dagesh.

Most families are now down to a meal a day, with children and the elderly given priority.

“But you see them wearing out and thinning in front of you – malnourished children. You see mothers who are trying to breastfeed, and there is nothing coming out of their breast,” she said.

Most of the refugees are women, children and some elderly people.

They say most of the able-bodied men were either killed or simply disappeared. So, they fled to save themselves and the children. They have nothing.

Faced with the hunger in the camps, some in South Sudan have tried to sell firewood. But Ms Dagesh says it exposes them to harassment, violence and rape.

Many of the refugees she met had come from Sudan’s agricultural areas. The war disrupted their lives and livelihoods.

They would want to see peace restored so they can go back home, but the fighting has been raging for close to two years now with no end in sight.

With the hunger situation deteriorating inside Sudan in the absence of a ceasefire, the closure of the kitchens supplying emergency meals will only increase the numbers fleeing across borders.

Yet aid agencies that normally would help are strained.

The UNHCR says it has been forced to rationalise “to levels where our interventions are absolutely limited – they are at the minimum”.

It does not help that the agency was already underfunded.

The UNHCR’s call for donor contributions last year yielded only 30% of the anticipated amount, forcing their teams to cut “everything”, including the number of meals and amount of water refugees could receive.

The US has been the UNHCR’s main funder and the announcement last month of the aid freeze and subsequent waiver appeared to have thrown things into limbo.

“We are still assessing, working with partners, to see the extent to which this is affecting our needs,” Mr Balde told the BBC.

Faced with impossible choices, some refugees are already resorting to seek refuge in third countries, including in the Gulf, Europe and beyond. Some are embarking on “very dangerous journeys”, he says.

END

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 7/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 6/OOM DONALD

[6]
”Mr. Trump, meanwhile, told reporters Saturday that the agency has “been run by a bunch of radical lunatics.””
CBSNEWS

Trump and Elon Musk are upending USAID. Here’s what to know about its work.

4 FEBRUARY 2025

Washington — President Trump and billionaire Elon Musk have set their sights on the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, overseeing a disruption of the more than 60-year-old organization that provides humanitarian aid to more than 100 countries.

The Trump administration’s targeting of USAID comes as the president has vowed to cut the size of the federal government and tasked Musk with leading the effort to do so through his Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has notified Congress that he is eyeing a potential reorganization, which could include merging it with the State Department.

But critics of Mr. Trump’s actions warn that the sweeping moves, which come just two weeks after he returned to office, threaten to put the nation at risk and undermine its credibility around the world. Lawmakers have also warned that any attempt to change the structure of USAID, an independent agency, would require action by Congress.

“If the United States is going to prevail in great power competition, we cannot afford to take a timeout from USAID programs that have long served to advance U.S. foreign policy goals,” the top Democrats on the House and Senate Foreign Affairs Committees said in a letter last week to Jason Gray, who was then serving as acting USAID administrator. “America needs to be active, and we must lead through our example.”

What is USAID?

The U.S. Agency for International Development is the federal government’s lead agency for international and development assistance. Established in 1961 when President John F. Kennedy signed the Foreign Assistance Act, USAID “works to end extreme global poverty and enable resilient, democratic societies to realize their potential,” according to an archived webpage from the agency.

The aid the organization provides is aimed at furthering numerous goals, including strengthening democracy, protecting human rights, improving global health and advancing food security, the page said.

USAID has more than 10,000 people in its workforce, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, and most of those employees — roughly two-thirds — are serving overseas. The agency has more than 60 country and regional missions.

The agency is funded by taxpayer dollars authorized by Congress and reports to the secretary of state.

According to an archived version of its website, USAID money has been used to provide nearly 9,000 ventilators to 43 countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, fund more than 150 local organizations to implement interventions for HIV and to launch the Countering Chinese Influence Fund. USAID said the fund will invest $300 million in programs to advance national security goals across several areas “to build more resilient partners that are able to withstand pressure from the [Chinese Community Party] and other malign actors.”

USAID was created at the height of the Cold War as part of a recognition by Kennedy and his successor, President Lyndon B. Johnson, of humanitarian aid as a form of diplomacy. With the agency outlasting the Cold War and new threats to U.S. interests emerging, Democrats in Congress have warned that Mr. Trump’s gutting of USAID threatens the nation’s ability to compete with China and Russia.

What is the USAID budget?

In fiscal year 2023, USAID managed more than $40 billion in appropriations, the Congressional Research Service said, a figure that is less than 1% of the federal budget.

Most of that funding went to governance programs, followed by the humanitarian and health sectors, according to the report. The countries that received the most money in fiscal year 2023 were Ukraine, Ethiopia and Jordan.

While the health sector received the most funding in the early 1990s, humanitarian assistance became the highest-funded area in fiscal year 2022 because of increases in aid following “natural and human-induced humanitarian crises,” according to the Congressional Research Service. Governance took the top spot for fiscal year 2023, though, because of U.S. support for Ukraine’s government amid the country’s war with Russia

The money approved for USAID by Congress is spent through the agency’s “implementing partners,” which include private contractors, nonprofit organizations, foreign governments and international groups.

What is going on with USAID now?

The agency has come under significant scrutiny by Musk and DOGE, which Mr. Trump has tasked with shrinking the size of the federal government.

Musk has repeatedly criticized USAID on X, the social media platform he owns, calling it a “criminal organization” that should “die.” He said early Monday that he had spoken with Mr. Trump about USAID and claimed the president agrees “we should shut it down.”

“USAID is a ball of worms. There is no apple and when there is no apple, you’ve just got to basically get rid of the whole thing,” Musk said, adding the agency is “beyond repair.”

Mr. Trump, meanwhile, told reporters Saturday that the agency has “been run by a bunch of radical lunatics.”

There has been a flurry of activity targeting USAID and its employees over the past few days. Roughly 60 senior staff were placed on administrative leave last week and hundreds of contractors had their employment furloughed or terminated, sources told CBS News.

Then, on Saturday, USAID’s website went dark, and two top security officials with the humanitarian aid agency were placed on administrative leave after they refused to let personnel from DOGE access classified information in restricted areas, according to the Associated Press.

Katie Miller, who works for DOGE, said on X that “no classified material was accessed without proper security clearances.”

Matt Hopson, who was tapped by Mr. Trump to serve as USAID chief of staff, resigned Sunday, two staffers told CBS News. Agency staff were told USAID’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., would be closed to them Monday, according to a notice they received.

The turmoil at USAID is set against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s 90-day freeze on foreign assistance, which has roiled programs worldwide and forced layoffs and furloughs. The order directed all U.S. diplomatic and consular posts to immediately issue “stop-work” orders for existing foreign assistance awards, pending review by the secretary.

But the secretary of state later issued a waiver that applies to “life-saving humanitarian assistance,” defined as “life-saving medicine, medical services, food, shelter, and subsistence assistance, as well as supplies and reasonable administrative costs as necessary to deliver such assistance.”

What will happen to USAID?

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, a Republican from Florida, told “Face the Nation” on Sunday that USAID would likely be “rolled more closely” under Rubio. He lamented that a fraction of what the agency spends goes to aid.

“I would be absolutely for, if that’s the path we go down, removing USAID as a separate department” and moving parts of it to the State Department, Mast said.

A day later, three U.S. officials told CBS News that USAID would remain a humanitarian aid entity, but would be merged into the State Department with cuts to its funding and workforce. The Trump administration is expected to announce the changes in the coming days. Rubio has been named acting administrator of USAID, and he told Congress in a letter obtained by CBS News that he authorized Peter Marocco, director of Foreign Assistance at the State Department, to perform the duties of deputy administrator.

The State Department said in a statement that Rubio has “notified Congress that a review of USAID’s foreign assistance activities is underway with an eye towards potential reorganization.”

Dr. Atul Gawande, former USAID Global Health director, told CBS News the move to target the agency is “dangerous for the country.”

“What we’re talking about are disaster relief workers, we’re talking about health workers and people who are doing good and protecting America around the world,” Gawande said. “You’re talking about 20 million people in the global HIV program that has reduced HIV around the world, they are going without medication that keeps them alive. You’re talking about disease outbreaks that are not being stopped, like bird flu, where monitoring has been turned off in 49 countries.”

In a series of posts on X, Gawande said a pause on foreign assistance “does serious damage to the world and the US.” He also posted a list of examples on how this can impact global health, including stopping work on a deadly Marburg outbreak in Tanzania, a wide outbreak of a mpox variant killing children in west Africa and stopping critical work to eradicate polio.

“Make no mistake — these essential, lifesaving activities are being halted right now. Consequences aren’t in some distant future. They are immediate,” he concluded his thread.

“Every administration goes through an overhaul that says they want to change policy, they want to change some direction, but you don’t decimate and demolish the institution in the process,” Gawande told CBS News. “There was no need to close down all of its functions, which is harming people.”

The Trump administration will not be the first to attempt to oversee a reorganization of USAID. A similar effort was made by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright during the Clinton administration under a two-year plan that would keep USAID as a separate agency but bring it under the secretary of state’s direct authority.

In 1998, Congress passed the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act, which established USAID as an independent agency and clarified that its administrator “shall report to and be under the direct authority and foreign policy guidance of the secretary of state.”

By the end of Bill Clinton’s presidency, USAID’s workforce had dropped from 11,500 employees to less than 8,000, and the number of countries with agency programs was cut from 120 to 70, according to the book “State vs Defense: The Battle to Define America’s Empire” by journalist Stephen Glain.

END

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 6/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 5/OOM DONALD

[5]
WIKIPEDIA
UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
BBC

USAID officially closes, attracting condemnation from Obama and Bush

2 JULY 2026

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) has officially closed its doors after President Donald Trump gradually dismantled the agency over its allegedly wasteful spending.

More than 80% of all the agency’s programmes were cancelled as of March, and on Tuesday the remainder were formally absorbed by the state department.

The shuttering of USAID – which administered aid for the US government, the world’s largest such provider – has been newly criticised by former Presidents Barack Obama and George W Bush.

These aid cuts could cause more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, according to a warning published by researchers in the Lancet medical journal.

The authors of the Lancet report called the numbers “staggering”, and projected that a third of those at risk of premature deaths were children.

A state department official said the study used “incorrect assumptions” and insisted that the US would continue to administer aid in a “more efficient” way, the AFP news agency reported.

Founded in 1961, USAID previously employed some 10,000 people, two-thirds of whom worked overseas, according to the Congressional Research Service.

The controversial cuts began early in Trump’s second term, when billionaire and former presidential adviser Elon Musk was tasked with shrinking the federal workforce.

The move was widely condemned by humanitarian organisations around the world.

Among the programmes that were curbed were efforts to provide prosthetic limbs to soldiers injured in Ukraine, to clear landmines in various countries, and to contain the spread of Ebola in Africa.

On Wednesday morning, the agency’s website continued to display a message saying that all USAID direct-hire personnel globally had been placed on administrative leave from 23 February.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio previously said that the remaining 1,000 programmes after the cuts would be administered under his department.

“This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end,” he added on Tuesday.

“Under the Trump Administration, we will finally have a foreign funding mission in America that prioritizes our national interests,” he wrote in a post on Substack.

Trump has repeatedly said he wants overseas spending to be closely aligned with his “America First” approach.

Bush and Obama delivered their messages of condemnation in a video conference they hosted with U2 singer Bono for thousands of members the USAID community.

Bush, a fellow member of Trump’s Republican Party, focused on the impact of cuts to an AIDS and HIV programme that was started by his administration and subsequently credited with saving 25 million lives.

“You’ve showed the great strength of America through your work – and that is your good heart,” Bush told USAID workers in a recorded statement, according to US media. “Is it in our national interests that 25 million people who would have died now live? I think it is, and so do you.”

Meanwhile Obama, a member of the opposition Democratic Party, affirmed the work that USAID employees had already done.

“Gutting USAID is a travesty, and it’s a tragedy. Because it’s some of the most important work happening anywhere in the world,” Obama was quoted as saying.

Long-time humanitarian advocate Bono spoke about the millions of people who he said could die because of the cuts.

“They called you crooks, when you were the best of us,” he told attendees of the video conference.

USAID was seen as integral to the global aid system. After Trump’s cuts were announced, other countries followed suit with their own reductions – including the UK, France and Germany.

Last month, the United Nations said it was dealing with “the deepest funding cuts ever to hit the international humanitarian sector”.

END

BBC

What is USAID and why is Trump poised to ‘close it down’?

7 FEBRUARY 2025

The future of the US government’s main overseas aid agency has been cast into doubt, with employees locked out and the Trump administration planning to merge it with the US Department of State.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) said thousands of employees would be put on leave shortly after President Donald Trump returned to office. The agency then recalled its workers from missions across the world.

Trump has made it clear he wants overseas spending to be closely aligned with his “America First” approach and the international development sector is braced for a profound effect on humanitarian programmes around the world.

Trump posted on his Truth Social page on Friday that USAID’s spending “IS TOTALLY UNEXPLAINABLE… CLOSE IT DOWN!”

Elon Musk, the tech billionaire working on the White House’s effort to shrink the federal government, has previously claimed that the aid agency is “a criminal organization” and that Trump has agreed to “shut it down”.

Neither Trump or Musk provided clear evidence to support their claims, and the president’s effort to shutter the agency is expected to face legal challenges.

What is USAID and what does it do?

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was set up in the early 1960s to administer humanitarian aid programmes on behalf of the US government.

It employs around 10,000 people, two-thirds of whom work overseas, according to the Congressional Research Service. It has bases in more than 60 countries and works in dozens of others. However, most of the work on the ground is carried out by other organisations that are contracted and funded by USAID.

The range of activities it undertakes is vast. For example, not only does USAID provide food in countries where people are starving, it also operates the world’s gold-standard famine detection system, which uses data analysis to try to predict where food shortages are emerging.

Much of USAID’s budget is spent on health programmes, such as offering polio vaccinations in countries where the disease still circulates and helping to stop the spread of viruses which have the potential to cause a pandemic.

The BBC’s charity BBC Media Action – an international development organisation that is completely separate from BBC News and funded by external grants and voluntary contributions – receives funding from USAID. According to a 2024 report, USAID donated $3.23m (£2.6m), making it the charity’s second-largest donor that financial year.

How much does USAID cost the US government?

According to government data, the US spent $68bn (£55bn) on international aid in 2023.

That total is spread across several departments and agencies, but USAID’s budget constitutes more than half of it at around $40bn – that’s about 0.6% of total US annual government spending of $6.75tn.

The vast majority of USAID money is spent in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and Europe – primarily on humanitarian efforts in Ukraine.

The US is the world’s biggest spender on international development – and by some margin.

To put it into context, the UK is the world’s fourth-largest aid spender. In 2023, it spent £15.3bn – around a quarter of what the US provided.

Why do Donald Trump and Elon Musk want to overhaul USAID?

Trump is a long-term critic of overseas spending and has said it is not a valuable use of taxpayer money. He has singled out USAID for particularly strong criticism.

The White House has published a list of USAID projects which it said were evidence of “waste and abuse”, including a grant of $1.5m to an LGBTQ group in Serbia, $2.5m for electric vehicles in Vietnam and $6m for tourism in Egypt.

Critics have disputed how the administration has framed this spending. For example, the Egypt project – which began in 2019 under Trump – lists water, education and transportation aid projects for the North Sinai region.

After returning to office, Trump signed an executive order that put almost all international spending on pause for a 90-day review.

Waivers were later issued for humanitarian programmes, but the announcement upended the world of international development and disrupted services.

White House officials and Musk have falsely shared information regarding some of USAID’s contracts.

Musk, for example, shared a false video promoting a debunked claim that USAID paid for Hollywood stars to visit Ukraine.

Programmes including those providing medication to the world’s poorest and installing clean water supplies had to stop overnight. One veteran humanitarian worker told the BBC the pause was “like an earthquake across the aid sector”.

Tensions between the White House and USAID escalated when Musk’s representatives were blocked by senior security officials – who were later placed on leave – from accessing secure data at USAID headquarters.

Secretary of State Rubio, who was put in charge of the agency by the White House, has maintained that “a lot of functions” carried out by the organisation would continue but that spending “has to be in alignment with the national interest”.

Abolishing USAID would likely enjoy popular support. According to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, US polling data going back to the 1970s has indicated broad support for foreign aid spending cuts.

Can Donald Trump shut USAID down?

While it is clear the White House wields significant influence over USAID, that power is theoretically limited.

USAID was created via Congress’s Foreign Assistance Act in 1961. That law mandated for a government agency to be set up and tasked with administering overseas spending.

Then-President John F Kennedy then created USAID via executive order. The agency’s status as an executive agency was enshrined by US law in 1998.

In short, that means Trump cannot necessarily simply abolish USAID by signing an executive order, and any attempt to do so would almost certainly face strong challenges in the courts and Congress.

Closing USAID altogether would likely require an act of Congress – where Trump’s Republican Party holds slim majorities in both chambers. Trump’s allies in Congress are beginning hearings to aid his effort there, however.

The Trump administration reportedly aims to make USAID a branch of the State Department, as opposed to it being a government agency in its own right.

This could be similar to when UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson merged the Department for International Development with the Foreign Office in 2020.

Ministers at the time said it would align international spending with the government’s foreign policy goals. Critics warned it may reduce aid sector expertise and damage the UK’s overseas standing and influence.

What would the effect of closing USAID be?

Give the size of US international aid, any changes to how that money is spent will be felt globally.

USAID’s activities range from providing prosthetic limbs to soldiers injured in Ukraine, to clearing landmines and containing the spread of Ebola in Africa.

After the 90-day overseas spending freeze was announced, Rubio said “every dollar” must be “justified” by evidence that it makes the US safer, stronger and more prosperous.

Democratic Party politicians have called the moves illegal and have said they would jeopardise national security, citing reports that prison guards in Syria, who were charged with securing thousands of Islamic State fighters, nearly walked off the job when US funding was paused.

There are also questions about how much the US will spend overseas in years to come, as Musk – empowered by Trump – attempts to cut billions from the government’s budget.

END

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 5/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 4/OOM DONALD

[4]

KNOW THY ENEMY!/PRESIDENT TRUMP’S INAUGURATION SPEECH

De Canadese premier Justin Trudeau heeft vrijdag op een bijeenkomst voor zakenlieden gezegd dat de Amerikaanse president Donald Trump serieus van plan is om Canada in te lijven. Trump zei de afgelopen weken meerdere keren dat hij van Canada de ‘51ste staat’ van de Verenigde Staten wil maken.

 

AD
8 FEBRUARI 2025
De Canadese premier Justin Trudeau heeft vrijdag op een bijeenkomst voor zakenlieden gezegd dat de Amerikaanse president Donald Trump serieus van plan is om Canada in te lijven. Trump zei de afgelopen weken meerdere keren dat hij van Canada de ‘51ste staat’ van de Verenigde Staten wil maken.

,Dat is hij echt van plan”, zei Trudeau, die denkt dat Trump zo toegang hoopt te krijgen tot kostbare mineralen. De Canadese premier deed de uitspraak bij een bijeenkomst achter gesloten deuren. Doordat er nog een microfoon aanstond, werd de uitspraak per ongeluk openbaar, melden Canadese media als CBC News.

‘Geen enkele kans’

Trump zei deze week vanuit het Witte Huis nog dat hij Canada graag zou inlijven. Trudeau, die begin dit jaar aankondigde dat hij binnenkort opstapt, benadrukte eerder al dat er ‘geen enkele kans’ is dat Canada ooit onderdeel zal worden van de VS. Ook noemde hij de uitspraken van Trump een ‘tactiek’, bedoeld om mensen af te leiden van de impact van handelstarieven.

Een mogelijke handelsoorlog tussen beide landen werd begin deze week op het laatste moment voorkomen doordat het instellen van hoge importtarieven tijdelijk werd uitgesteld. Trump had heffingen van 25 procent aangekondigd op goederen uit Canada, maar draaide die terug toen Canada onder meer liet weten 10.000 mensen aan de grens met de VS in te zetten om drugshandel te bestrijden.

In een bericht op sociale media zei Trudeau dat Canada 1,3 miljard Canadese dollar zou steken in het beveiligen van de grens. Iets wat Canada al had gedaan in recente maanden. Ook gaat het land een ‘Fentanyl Tsaar’ benoemen en drugskartels als terroristen aanmerken. Dat was voor Trump voldoende om de aangekondigde heffingen in de ijskast te zetten.

EINDE

RTL NIEUWS
VS MAAKT SDERIEUS WERK VAN INLIJVEN GROENLAND
”ESSENTIEEL VOOR ONZE VEILIGHEID”
22 DECEMBER 2025
De Amerikaanse president Donald Trump heeft een speciale gezant aangewezen voor Groenland. Dat land wil hij graag bij de Verenigde Staten voegen. Groenland maakt officieel deel uit van Denemarken. De Deense regering is allesbehalve blij met de aanstelling en roept de Amerikaanse ambassadeur op het matje.
Amerika’s wens om Groenland in te lijven, leek een beetje naar de achtergrond verdwenen. Maar afgelopen nacht was daar ineens een bericht van Trump op Truth Social: hij had Jeff Landry, gouverneur van de staat Louisiana, aangesteld als speciaal gezant voor het eiland. “Jeff begrijpt hoe essentieel Groenland is voor onze nationale veiligheid en zal de belangen van ons land krachtig behartigen”, schrijft Trump in zijn aankondiging.

Belangrijk voor VS

Landry bedankt Trump op X: “Het is een eer om u te dienen in deze vrijwilligersfunctie om Groenland onderdeel te maken van de VS. Dit heeft op geen enkele manier invloed op mijn functie als gouverneur van Louisiana!”

Groenland is om meerdere redenen belangrijk voor de VS. Zo liggen er zeldzame aardmetalen en is het strategisch geleden in de strijd om het Noordpoolgebied. In de volgende video worden die redenen uitgelegd:

Al in zijn eerste periode als president toonde Trump interesse in Groenland. Tijdens zijn tweede termijn werd die een stuk concreter: zo stuurde hij zijn zoon naar het eiland en bezocht ook vicepresident Vance het. Laatstgenoemde zei toen onder meer dat Denemarken te weinig naar Groenland omkijkt en er te weinig in investeert.

Groenland, een Deense oud-kolonie met circa 57.000 inwoners, heeft sinds 2009 het recht om de onafhankelijkheid van Denemarken uit te roepen. Bij zijn bezoek zinspeelde Vance erop dat Groenland, na onafhankelijkheid van Denemarken, bij de VS zou kunnen komen. De regeringen in Groenland en Denemarken hebben dat plan herhaaldelijk afgewezen.

Wie is Jeff Landry?

Waarom nou exact Landry de nieuw in het leven geroepen functie heeft gekregen, is niet bekendgemaakt. Landry staat bekend als Trump-loyalist, zijn staat Louisiana is ook van oudsher op de hand van de Republikeinen. In januari dit jaar sprak Landry op X zijn steun uit voor het idee om van Groenland Amerikaans grondgebied te maken: “President Donald J. Trump heeft volkomen gelijk! We moeten ervoor zorgen dat Groenland zich bij de Verenigde Staten aansluit. Geweldig voor hen, geweldig voor ons! Laten we het regelen!”

Evenmin is duidelijk hoe zijn werk als speciaal gezant eruit gaat zien. “Ik neem aan dat hij moet ontdekken welke opties er zijn met betrekking tot het inlijven van Groenland”, zegt Amerikadeskundige Kenneth Manusama.

Denemarken ontbiedt Amerikaanse ambassadeur

Daarvoor zal Landry wel in gesprek moeten met de zeer ontevreden Denen. “Groenland behoort toe aan de Groenlanders, en de VS zou Groenland niet moeten overnemen”, reageert de Deense premier Frederiksen bij TV2. “We verwachten respect voor onze gemeenschappelijke territoriale integriteit.”

Vanwege de aanstelling van Landry roept de Deense minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Rasmussen de Amerikaanse ambassadeur in zijn land op het matje. Vandaag of morgen zullen de twee een gesprek hebben. Rasmussen verlangt dan ‘opheldering’ van de ambassadeur, zegt hij tegen TV2.

EINDE

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 4/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noot 3/OOM DONALD

[3]
VS AANVAL OP VENEZUELA EN ONTVOERING ZITTENDE
PRESIDENT MADURO/VS BANDITISME AAN HET WERK!/EERSTE
IMPRESSIE
ASTRID ESSED
5 JANUARI 2026

THE GUARDIAN

Leaked ‘Gaza Riviera’ plan dismissed as ‘insane’ attempt to cover ethnic cleansing

Prospectus proposes forced displacement of entire population and puts territory into US trusteeship

A plan circulating in the White House to develop the “Gaza Riviera” as a string of high-tech megacities has been dismissed as an “insane” attempt to provide cover for the large-scale ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian territory’s population.

On Sunday the Washington Post published a leaked prospectus for the plan, which would involve the forced displacement of Gaza’s entire population of 2 million people and put the territory into a US trusteeship for at least a decade.

Named the Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust – or Great – the proposal was reportedly developed by some of the same Israelis who created and set in motion the US- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation with financial planning contributed by Boston Consulting Group.

Most controversially, the 38-page plan suggests what it calls “temporary relocation of all of Gaza’s more than 2 million population” – a proposal that would amount to ethnic cleansing, potentially a genocidal act.

Palestinians would be encouraged into “voluntary” departure to another country or into restricted, secure zones during reconstruction. Those who own land would be offered “a digital token” by the trust in exchange for rights to redevelop their property, to be used to finance a new life elsewhere.

Those who stay would be housed in properties with a tiny footprint of 323 sq ft – minuscule even by the standards of many non-refugee camp homes in Gaza.

It was not clear if the plan reflects US policy, and neither the White House nor the State Department responded to the Washington Post’s request for comment. But the prospectus seem to reflect Donald Trump’s previously stated ambition to “clean out” Gaza and redevelop it.

Among critics of the leaked prospectus was Philip Grant, the executive director of Trial International, a human rights group based in Switzerland, who called the plan “a blueprint for mass deportation, marketed as development”.

“This is a blueprint for mass deportation, marketed as development. The outcome? A textbook case of international crimes on an unimaginable scale: forcible population transfer, demographic engineering, and collective punishment,” Grant said.

Trial is one of fifteen groups that have previously warned that private contractors operating in Gaza in collaboration with the Israeli government risk “aiding and abetting or otherwise being complicit in crimes under international law, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide”, and that they may be liable under several jurisdictions.

“Those involved in the planning and execution of such a plan – including corporate actors – could face legal liability for decades to come,” Grant said.

Even in the Israeli media the proposal invited incredulity, with a column in the left-leaning Haaretz describing it as “a Trumpian get-rich-quick scheme reliant on war crimes, AI and tourism”.

The highly fanciful prospectus – subtitled “From a Demolished Iranian Proxy to a Prosperous Abrahamic Ally”– appears to have been drawn up by people with no physical knowledge of Gaza, the politics of the Middle East or the likely challenges in attempting to rebuild the territory as a multibillion-dollar tourism and technology hub that would inevitably compete with Israel.

The scheme, described as requiring no US funding and intended to be funded by investors to the tune of $100bn, envisages a bustling port city bisected by a watercourse and bordered by up to eight leafy AI-powered high-tech megacities, apparently modelled after Saudi Arabia’s troubled Neom project.

It also envisages an “Elon Musk” manufacturing park located – without irony – on the ruins of the Erez industrial zone, which was built with Israeli investment to exploit cheap labour in the Palestinian territory and subsequently closed and destroyed by Israeli forces.

Examination of the map appears to suggest the plan would also involve the expropriation for an Israeli security buffer zone of much of Gaza’s agricultural land, which tends to be located at Gaza’s periphery close to the border with Israel.

The small print is most damning, however, making no distinction in terms of sovereignty between Gaza, Israel and Egypt, suggesting no consideration has been made for Palestinian self determination. Under the plan, Israel would maintain vaguely defined “overarching rights” over Gaza “to meet its security needs”. There would be no Palestinian state but a “Palestinian polity” which would join Trump’s Abraham Accords.

The entire language in the prospectus, and labelling of several features, appears aimed at appealing to the vanity of Trump, Musk, and Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, for whom the security ring around Gaza is named.

According to the Boston Consulting Group, quoted by the Post, work on the document was not approved and two senior partners who led the financial planning had been fired.

That criticism was echoed by HA Hellyer, a senior associate at the Royal United Services Institute who suggested that the details of the plan were so clearly ludicrous that the proposal should not be taken seriously at face value.

“It’s insane. What is important is what the plan points to, and that is not a new idea: the Israel determination that there should be no Palestinian sovereignty or self determination in Gaza.

“The US has made clear since February [when details of plans for a Trump Riviera in Gaza first emerged] that they are OK with the idea of ethnic cleansing in Gaza.

“The notion that this would be about ‘voluntary departure’ when Palestinians in Gaza have no choice but to be shot or starved.”

Katherine Gallagher, a senior lawyer at the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, said that “any company that aligns itself with Israel – and seemingly, Trump – in a plan to forcibly transfer Palestinians from their homes in Gaza is opening itself up to significant legal liability at home and under universal jurisdiction”.

The CCR recently sued the Trump administration for records of its funding of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the private outfit overseeing aid distribution in Gaza and at whose sites hundreds of Palestinians have been killed while queuing for food.

The prospectus was leaked days after Trump held a White House meeting to discuss day-after planning for Gaza attended by the former British prime minister Tony Blair, who has contributed views on Gaza’s future to the Trump administration and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

The leaked plan was also rejected by senior Hamas official Basem Naim who said: “Gaza is not for sale.

“Gaza is part of the greater Palestinian homeland.”

END

TRUMP’S 20-POINT GAZA PEACE PLAN/WHY ITS WRONG

ASTRID ESSED

20 NOVEMBER 2025

Trump’s 20-point Gaza Peace Plan/Why it’s wrong | Astrid Essed

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 3/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Noten 1 en 2/OOM DONALD

[1]
KNOW THY ENEMY!/PRESIDENT TRUMP’S INAUGURATION SPEECH
[2]

Iran al jaren achter Hamas

Hamas vindt in Iran zijn belangrijkste partner. Al jarenlang zijn er nauwe banden tussen het Iraanse regime en Hamas. Iran steunt Hamas door middel van wapenleveranties en trainingen.

NOS

WIE STEUNT WIE: IRAN PAL ACHTER HAMAS,

VS STEUNT ISRAEL

10 OCTOBER 2023

Wie steunt wie: Iran pal achter Hamas, VS helpt Israël

Hamas en Israël zijn de strijdende, maar lang niet de enige twee betrokken partijen in het sinds zaterdag in alle heftigheid opgelaaide conflict in het Midden-Oosten. Ook Iran en de Verenigde Staten zitten er diep in. Maar wie steunt wie nou eigenlijk, en op wat voor manier? In dit artikel zetten we het voor je op een rijtje.

De internationale gemeenschap bemoeit zich op alle mogelijke manieren met het conflict tussen Hamas en Israël. Vanuit het buitenland zijn er twee voorname spelers betrokken: de Verenigde Staten en Iran. Maar ook andere wereldwijde mogendheden, zoals de Europese Unie, Rusland en China, nemen duidelijk stelling.

Iran al jaren achter Hamas

Hamas vindt in Iran zijn belangrijkste partner. Al jarenlang zijn er nauwe banden tussen het Iraanse regime en Hamas. Iran steunt Hamas door middel van wapenleveranties en trainingen.

 

“Het Iraanse leiderschap heeft zich altijd vierkant achter de Palestijnen geschaard”, zegt Paul Aarts, Midden-Oostendeskundige van de Universiteit van Amsterdam en Clingendael. “Zolang de Palestijnen onder een militaire bezetting leven, zal Iran zijn steun uitspreken.”

Dat heeft er mede mee te maken dat er sinds eind jaren 70 een antiwesters en vooral anti-Amerikaans regime heerst in Iran. “En dus ook anti-Israëlisch”, zegt Aarts. “Op welke manier Iran de wapens precies in Gaza weet te krijgen, is moeilijk te achterhalen. Maar duidelijk is dat het gebeurt.”

‘Zeer dubieus’

In het Iraanse parlement werd met gejuich en applaus gereageerd op de gebeurtenissen in Israël. Er is dan ook volop speculatie over eventuele betrokkenheid van Iran bij de aanval van Hamas. Hamas zegt zelf van wel. Volgens een artikel in The Wall Street Journal zou Iran zelfs samen met Hamas de aanval hebben beraamd en uiteindelijk groen licht hebben gegeven.

“Ik vind dat soort artikelen zeer dubieus”, zegt Aarts. Het lijkt hem ‘erg onwaarschijnlijk’ dat Iran zoiets zou doen. “Iran zoekt de laatste tijd juist toenadering bij andere landen in de regio, en wil zich absoluut geen aanval van Israël op de hals halen. Bovendien: Hamas is heel goed georganiseerd. Die hebben geen sturing van buitenaf nodig.”

‘Ook steun uit Rusland’

De steun van Iran betekent wel dat Hamas ook op steun vanuit Rusland kan rekenen. “Daar kunnen we heel simpel over zijn”, zegt Ruslandkenner Hans van Koningsbrugge (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen). “Iran is een van de weinige Russische bondgenoten. Als Iran de Palestijnen steunt, doet Rusland dat ook.”

Dat er veel van oorsprong Russische joden in Israël wonen, doet daar niets aan af. “Die zijn naar een andere wereld vertrokken”, zegt Van Koningsbrugge. “De Russen zien dat niet meer als hun bondgenoten.”

De Russische minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, Sergej Lavrov, liet al weten dat volgens Rusland de enige weg uit het conflict is om een aparte Palestijnse staat te creëren. Dat is een boodschap die ook vanuit China klinkt.

VS belangrijkste partner Israël

De Verenigde Staten zijn wereldwijd dé belangrijke partner van Israël. Jaarlijks vloeit er al zo’n 3,8 miljard dollar aan steun vanuit de Amerikaanse staatskas richting Israël. En daar komt nu nog een flink pakket bij. Er is al een vliegdekschip met militair materieel onderweg.

“De VS staat, van links tot rechts, vierkant achter Israël. Geen twijfel over mogelijk”, zegt correspondent Erik Mouthaan. “Er leeft hier een grote joodse bevolking, en Amerika is destijds ook betrokken geweest bij de stichting van de Israëlische staat.”

Dat terwijl er in Amerika in recente jaren ook steeds meer kritiek is geweest op de behandeling van Palestijnen door Israël. Vooral jonge Democraten maken zich druk om mensenrechtenschendingen. En ook het beleid van de regering van premier Netanyahu, die volgens critici de rechtsstaat probeert af te breken, wordt niet door alle Amerikanen gewaardeerd. President Biden weigerde onlangs zelfs om Netanyahu te ontvangen.

Eigen belang

“Maar nu is het land echt aangevallen, en dus wordt de politiek over bezette gebieden even opzijgezet”, zegt Mouthaan. “Er is even geen enkele kritiek op Israël te horen. Biden heeft tegen Netanyahu gezegd: doe alles wat je moet doen om terug te slaan.”

Bovendien is er ook een groot eigen belang. Er zouden zeker elf Amerikanen zijn omgekomen bij de aanval van Hamas, en meerdere Amerikanen zijn gekidnapt. “Amerika is er niet vies van om met commando’s aan de grond te proberen deze mensen terug te krijgen”, zegt Mouthaan. “En dan is een goede samenwerking met Israël belangrijk.”

‘EU eensgezind, maar kan weinig’

In de Europese Unie is er met grote afkeuring gereageerd op de aanval van Hamas, die ook in Europa als terreurbeweging wordt aangemerkt. De Europese Commissie geeft zo’n 691 miljoen euro aan ontwikkelingssteun in Palestijnse gebieden, maar Eurocommissaris Oliver Varhelyi besloot dat per direct stop te zetten.

“Daar is wel meteen veel kritiek op gekomen”, zegt politiek verslaggever Fons Lambie. “Lidstaten zeggen: dat moeten wij bepalen, niet de Eurocommissaris.” Varhely kwam even later dan ook terug op zijn besluit.

Nederlandse steun blijft

Verschillende lidstaten, zoals Duitsland en Oostenrijk, hebben zelf al besloten hun financiële steun aan Palestijnse projecten stop te zetten. Nederland deed dat niet. “Al willen VVD en CDA wel dat de uitgaven nog eens goed onder de loep worden genomen”, zegt Lambie.

En ook als het om militaire steun gaat, ligt de beslissing bij landen zelf. “De EU kan verder vrij weinig. Morgen steken de ministers van Buitenlandse Zaken de koppen bij elkaar. Er zal dan, als ze het daarover eens worden, een gezamenlijke verklaring over het conflict worden gemaakt.”

EINDE

[2009] WESTERN LEADERS WALK OUT OF

AHMADINEJAD SPEECH AT DURBAN II/HYPOCRISY

AND  VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS

ASTRID ESSED

2009/Western diplomats walk out of Ahmadinejad speech at Durban II/Hypocrisy and violations of human rights | Astrid Essed

VENEZOLAANSE PRESIDENT HUGO CHAVEZ OVERLEDEN/GEEN HELD/GEEN DICTATOR/ENKELE

KANTTEKENINGEN

ASTRID ESSED

15 MAART 2013

Venezolaanse president Hugo Chavez overleden/Geen held/Geen dictator/Enkele kanttekeningen | Astrid Essed

ON THE DEATH OF THE VENEZUELAN PRESIDENT

HUGO CHAVEZ/NO HERO/NO DICTATOR

ASTRID ESSED

3 APRIL 2013

On the death of the Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez/No hero/No dictator | Astrid Essed

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noten 1 en 2/OOM DONALD

Opgeslagen onder Divers

ICE OUT!/Bruce Springsteen/Streets of Minneapolis

Cover art for Streets of Minneapolis by Bruce Springsteen

IN GRATEFUL MEMORY OF RENEE GOOD AND ALEX PERETTI
MAY THEY REST IN PEACE
ASTRID ESSED

YOUTUBE.COM

Bruce Springsteen – Streets Of Minneapolis (Official Lyric Video)

Bruce Springsteen – Streets Of Minneapolis (Official Lyric Video)

BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN
STREETS OF MINNEAPOLIS
[Verse 1]
Through the winter’s ice and cold
Down Nicollet Avenue

A city aflame fought fire and ice
‘Neath an occupier’s boots
King Trump’s private army from the DHS
Guns belted to their coats
Came to Minneapolis to enforce the law
Or so their story goes[Verse 2]
Against smoke and rubber bullets
In the dawn’s early light
Citizens stood for justice
Their voices ringin’ through the night

And there were bloody footprints
Where mercy should have stood
And two dead, left to die on snow-filled streets
Alex Pretti and Renée Good[Chorus]
Oh, our Minneapolis, I hear your voice
Singing through the bloody mist
We’ll take our stand for this land
And the stranger in our midst
Here in our home, they killed and roamed
In the winter of ’26
We’ll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis
[Verse 3]
Trump’s federal thugs beat up on
His face and his chest

Then we heard the gunshots
And Alex Pretti lay in the snow dead
Their claim was self-defense, sir

Just don’t believe your eyes
It’s our blood and bones
And these whistles and phones

Against Miller and Noem’s dirty lies[Chorus]
Oh, our Minneapolis, I hear your voice
Crying through the bloody mist
We’ll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis[Harmonica Solo][Verse 4]
Now they say they’re here to uphold the law
But they trample on our rights
If your skin is black or brown, my friend
You can be questioned or deported on sight

In our chants of “ICE out now”
Our city’s heart and soul persists
Through broken glass and bloody tears
On the streets of Minneapolis
[Chorus]
Oh, our Minneapolis, I hear your voice
Singing through the bloody mist
Here in our home, they killed and roamed
In the winter of ’26
We’ll take our stand for this land
And the stranger in our midst

We’ll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis
We’ll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis[Outro]
ICE out (ICE out)
ICE out (ICE out)
ICE out (ICE out)
ICE out (ICE out)
ICE out (ICE out)
ICE out

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor ICE OUT!/Bruce Springsteen/Streets of Minneapolis

Opgeslagen onder Divers

Bridgerton/My first Comment on the Netflix series Bridgerton/About the relationship of Lady Violet Bridgerton and her son Anthony

Violet-S3E4

LADY VIOLET BRIDGERTON
Anthony_2x07-4
ANTHONY BRIDGERTON
LADY VIOLET’S SON

BRIDGERTON/MY FIRST COMMENT ON THE NETFLIX SERIES BRIDGERTON/ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP OF

LADY VIOLET BRIDGERTON AND HER ELDEST SON ANTHONY

[Readers, later I will explain more about this]

IN THE CLASHES WITH ANTHONY, LADY VIOLET BRIDGERTON DID NOT
SHOW HERSELF A WARM AND LOVING MOTHER, NOT EMOTIONALLY BEING PRESENT, WHEN HE NEEDED HER MOST
Lady Violet Bridgerton never realized, that Anthony was just a boy of 18 years,
when his father died, fresh from Eton and now having to carry all responsibilities
of a great noble Estate.
Instead of encouraging him, she constant scolded him, no friendly word and
comparing him with his father, which was unfair, since his father was the yearlong
Earl [Count?] of the Estate.
And….a good mother is tender to all her children, instead of seven and left the eldest
in the cold.

And take for example her different reaction regarding her daughter Daphne, marrying

Anthony’s best friend Simon, Duke of Hastings [apart from the duel drama from which
mother Violet, happily, was unaware], in comparison with her attitude regarding
Anthony”s love [otherwise a relationship, although on and off, doesn’t last at
least six years]for opera singer Siena Rosso.
And YES
I know and realize that in the Regency Time a marriage or openly relastionship
between a Viscount and an opera singer was not appropriate and was not accepted.
I realize Lady Violet couldn’t support that.
But at least she could have shown some compassion and comfort to her son,
who needed her as a mother too, instead of harsh disapproval and only
pointing out to his duties, for him to believe, that to his mother, only social
status weighted and that she didn’t see him as her son, but only as
the Head of the Household.
He was just a boy and needed his mother too.
Besides, it must have hurt her emotionally too, that she and her son always
clashed.
In some things she told him she was right, of course, but she didn’t criticize him
with love, always hateful and stern
VIOLET”S PERSPECTIVE
And don’t get me wrong.
I don”t say she did not love him, because watching the show I noticed that
she loved him deeply and warmly, also in Season 1.
But she didn’t show it.
Admitted:
She mourned her husband very much and thereafter she had a traumatic
childbirth, was so depressed [which she could help either] that she
couldn’t be there for Anthony and the other children, laying all the weight on
Anthony.
But she did not appreciate everything what he did, untill in Season 2
And I do understand the impossibility of their both positions.
Anthony now being the head of the Household [immediately after
her husband’s death she had to leave the marital bedroom, that now belonged
to Anthony as new Viscount and he had to make the medical decision at her
childbirth to ”choose” between the life of his mother and the unborn baby, which
was traumatic to her and also Anthony]
That shift of positions  gave them both an unnatural relationship from mother and just the eldest son to the Head of the Family and
she as indulger of his decisions or critic.
But she remains his mother and, showing him his duties [in which
she was right], not granting him HER moral and emotional
duty to give him motherly support, although I understand that sometimes
she had to be stern.
CONCLUSION:
Lady Violet loved Anthony deeply.
I don’t doubt that at all.
But while criticizing him [which was sometimes of course necessary]
she showed no warmth, valued ”the ton” and ”Family honor” which he
indeed had to preserve, above her natural love for him and when aware of
the Siena Rosso affair, she didn’t give him any comfort or warmth
[like ”I know it’s hard for you to end the relationship, but given the apparent
social ostracism for you and the Family you have no choice darling” or something
like that]
She couldn’t just use the excuse of being ”mortified by the scandal” or
”damaging the Family honor or the marrying chances of her daughters, although true.
When your child is grieving [and she must know he was, since she herself had seen
him watching Siena], you comfort your child, not just ”sacrificing his apparent
happiness to the happiness of the other seven”
Poor boy
He must felt so abandoned, if the person, who is supposed to love
you most, leaves you into the cold.
I understand her point of view too. Yet it is unforgivable and he should
have stood up against her.
”Mother, I need you too, and I am not just ”the Head of the Family’, who must
do my duties”
I am also your son.”
APOLOGIES
Therefore I am pleased, that she apologized in Season 2 [although not
for her emotional neglect of Anthony in the Siena Rosso affair] for
the heavy burden she put on him and not seeing his emotional
pain and isolation [after all he mourned for his father too and as she, had
watched him die]
Her very words touched me:
“I am sorry for everything that happened in the days that followed. If I could go back and change it, you have no idea. I would go back and change everything”
It was deeply moving, especially spoken in a historic Time, that
parents seldom apologized to their children.
CONCLUSION
Although failing for a time in her emotional approach of
Anthony, Lady Violet was at heart a warm and loving
mother, also to him, flawed by the strict demands of the Regency Time on social aspects, the different role of sons and daughters,
especially the ”Head of the Family” and her own intense grief
after her husband’s sudden death.
She had the courage, finally to acknowledge the pain she
unwillingly caused to her son, so preventing that she lost him
emotionally
SEE FUTURE POSTS ON MY BLOG
ASTRID ESSED

Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Bridgerton/My first Comment on the Netflix series Bridgerton/About the relationship of Lady Violet Bridgerton and her son Anthony

Opgeslagen onder Divers