From Afro News

The UN Under Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), Abdoulie Janneh, has said that the current economic downturn could cost the African continent $251 billion in 2009 and $277 billion in 2010 in export earnings, despite earlier predictions that the continent would not be hard hit.

In a paper presented at a high-level panel on the “Financial Crisis Impacts and Responses: An African Perspective” during the 65th session of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), which was held in the United Nations Conference Centre (UNCC), Bangkok, Thailand, from 23-29 April 2009, Mr Janneh said that those predictions had been proven wrong by the hard realities of the economic crisis.

Now, it is clear that the “social effects of the crisis will be particularly hard felt in Africa because there are little or no mechanisms to cushion the effect on ordinary people such as unemployment benefits or social security arrangements,” he pointed out.

Besides, the effects of the crisis have been manifested “in slowdown of growth, weakening currencies, declining stock market indices and sharply reduced commodity exports,” he explained.

The ECA says snvestment flows, remittances and tourism receipts, growth and capital inflows have not been spared. For example, an assessment by the ECA indicates that in 2009 the crisis will reduce growth in Africa from an average of 6 percent over the past decade, by between 2 and 4 percentage points, depending on assumptions made about resource flows to the region as well as the effectiveness of policy responses to the crisis by advanced countries.

“Foreign direct investment and other sources of private capital flows are expected to decline in 2009. Prior to the crisis, countries such as Ghana and Gabon successfully issued bonds in international capital market. As a result of the crisis, this source of external finance has dried up and several African countries are facing difficulties issuing bonds in international capital markets,” said Mr Janneh.

He also said the social impact of drying up of these sources of development finance has implications for achieving the MDGs in Africa. For example, the ECA believes that the expected declines in development finance will reduce the ability of African governments to fund health, education, infrastructure and nutrition programs with dire consequences for poverty reduction.

As explained by ECA executive secretary, the crisis would also affect poverty in the region through the impact on unemployment. Recent studies indicate that in 2009, the number of unemployed people in Sub-Saharan Africa will increase by 3 million relative to the 2007 figure.

Mr Janneh, who was in the official African delegation to the G20 Summit, also outlined the measures that African countries have taken in the form of policy responses to mitigate the impact of the financial crisis on their economies.

“These include interest rate reductions, recapitalisation of financial institutions, increase liquidity to banks and firms, fiscal stimulus, trade policy changes, and regulatory reforms,” he said.

He recalled that “the policy measures advocated by Africa were presented to the G20 Summit by its representatives, notably the Prime Minister of Ethiopia who represented the continent in his capacity as Chairperson of the Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD)”

The 65th session of ESCAP comprised of a Senior Officials segment from 23-25 April 2009 and a Ministerial segment from 27-29 April was attended by delegates from 62 ESCAP member States to discuss their collective challenges and to propose a coordinated response.

THE PIRATE EXCUSE

We are drilled constantly on the threat of piracy, with nearly every incident in the past year making mainstream news headlies. One would be hard pressed to find any media attention given to these issues years prior, when the same events were occuring, and the year before that and before that etc. So why now is it prime time news? Why is it now considered the number 1 threat, and how timely has this "threat to all humanity" (as Fox news refers to it) manifested?

...How timely is it that during the 'economic crisis' the G20 member states (who have united to bank the rest of the world into submission) have united to fight the pirate threat... And now the Al CIAda association... and we all know what comes after that...

At this years G20 conference new headway was made in the devision of a global system of monetary control.  A pool of FIAT currencies from g20 members  intended to be lent to 'developing' (LOL) countries at interest. Multi-lateral agreements between the top 20 producing (consuming) countries will ensure the preservation of the global status quo for years to come, and keep the 170 other countries in line. What was needed was an event that would galvanize these military powers towards a common end, some insignificant enemy they could all rally around destroying to display the solidarity of the worlds super powers. The global economic crisis was but one of the many new 'global' crises, be it pandemic, internet viruses or economic collapses, all part of the conditioning towards an oppressive global regime. And no... not a communist one, you indoctrinated fucks.

At the time AL Qaeda was in short supply, so pirates had to suffice, now the two "enemies of freedom" are being associated will one another, to a point of publicizing stories for pirates to hear, i.e. that Osama and his brethren are impressed with their 'terrorist' efforts and thus condoning the high-sea misdeeds... Thankfully the AL CIAda spokesman referred to the pirates as his brethren, because thats clearly the best thing any pirate could ask for is to be associated with the number 1 western scapegoat of all time!!! Ahhh I can see the aid flowing into Africa now! Oh wait! Thats arms shipments, and overpriced pharmaceuticals, and... AIDS!

As sub-saharan Africa prepares to endure one of the worst droughts in the history of the continent.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13246

This is your new blog post. Click here and start typing, or drag in elements from the top bar.

Bush's program did what it sought to do, that is, capitalize on the progressively bleak situation regarding AID's in Africa. Why would a neo-conservative triple aid to Africa in order to save African lives? Its necessary PR to overshadow the trillions wasted and funneled into illegal wars, and no bid contracted construction companies bank rolls. So where did this 20 billion dollars go?

The truth is companies such as Pfizer, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and companies like Bristol-Myers Squibb, Glaxo-Wellcome lobby to prevent the availability of cheap drugs to regions hardest hit by the AID's virus. Thus this relatively small 20 billion (a very generous estimate of total program cost) paid by tax payers is cycled back into the pockets of the most profitable industry on earth, with the side effect of not reducing the overall prevalence of AIDs, allowing the eugenics agenda to continue in a humane and profitable way... Thankfully these companies who are at the forefront of pharmacology have a monopoly over the industry and are thus in a position to impede the development of a preventative vaccine...