Three scenarios for three diseases

by Bill Bowtell - 13 April 2010 3:15PM

This year, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria comes to the end of its three-year funding cycle. On 4-5 October, the UN Secretary-General, as Chair of the Third Global Fund Replenishment, will convene in New York a meeting of present and potential Global Fund donors to the Fund for 2011-2013.

In 2007, the Second Global Fund Replenishment took place at the height of the global boom. Donors then pledged some US$10 billion that has since enabled countries supported by the Fund to place 2.5 million people on anti-retroviral treatment for HIV/AIDS, detect and treat 6 million new cases of infectious tuberculosis and distribute 104 million insecticide-treated bed-nets to prevent malarial infection.

This year, however, the Fund and its major donors are meeting in far less propitious economic circumstances.

On 24-25 March, I joined the Fund's senior management, its major governmental and private sector donors and civil society advocates at a meeting in The Hague that marked the formal start of six months of haggling and negotiation that will culminate in the October meeting in New York, at which time new pledges will be made.

read more

In defence of UNAIDS

by Bill Bowtell - 11 December 2009 9:07AM

In yesterday's Australian, Philip Stevens argued against the creation of a new UN agency for climate change on the grounds that, in 1996, the UN created a special agency — UNAIDS — to deal with 'another apparently global crisis - AIDS'.

Stevens asserts that UNAIDS 'distorted the science' of AIDS to predict a 'devastating heterosexual pandemic all over the world' but that there was 'never any prospect of a heterosexual pandemic outside southern Africa'. He claims that the 'scary headlines' generated by UNAIDS advocacy increased global funding for AIDS from $US1billion in 2000 to $US13.7billion last year.

Stevens thus adds UNAIDS and the global response to HIV/AIDS to the long and growing list of climate change consipirators. But in doing so, he completely misrepresents the facts about the global HIV/AIDS pandemic.

The 'apparent' global HIV/AIDS pandemic seems big enough to the 25 million people killed by AIDS since 1982 and the 35 million who currently live with HIV infection. Philips might care to chat about his definition of 'crisis' to the relatives of the 2 million people who died from AIDS and the 2.7 million who acquired HIV in 2008, most who will never obtain the treatment they need to stay alive.

read more

HIV/AIDS: The endemic problem

by Bill Bowtell - 3 December 2009 9:26AM

This piece was originally published on ABC Unleashed.

Over 25 years since the emergence of the HIV/AIDS virus, some 25 million people have perished from AIDS. The global caseload of HIV cases is approaching 35 million.

In 2008 alone, the rolling holocaust of the pandemic claimed another 2 million people and 2.7 million were newly infected with HIV. The lives of tens of millions of people, their families and communities have been blighted by the disease.

Unsustainable financial and logistical burdens have been imposed upon the health systems and budgets of weak and fragile states, including those of our nearest neighbours Papua New Guinea and Timor Leste. While the developed world, apart from the US, acted swiftly and effectively to contain HIV infection rates, the pandemic is continuing to advance in many parts of central Africa, Latin America and some parts of Asia.

Even in Australia, where our initial response to HIV/AIDS was bold, radical and right, the number of new cases of HIV infection has increased at an unacceptably high rate over the past four years or so. So the situation we confront in 2009 is as serious and as grave as it has ever been. Yet it is by no means hopeless. If we choose to act wisely and responsibly, we may yet bring the worst excesses of the pandemic under sustained control and management.

But effective global HIV/AIDS containment first requires us to understand how and why we got into this mess.

read more

Afghanistan: The imperial temptation

by Bill Bowtell - 22 July 2009 3:03PM

Thomas Friedman’s column on Afghan children was not just, as Sam observed, cloying.

It could have been lifted word for word from any 19th or 20th century European or American newspaper account of missionaries educating natives about European virtues in the exotic and far-flung reaches of Empire. These sentimental articles drummed up domestic political support, and donations, for the ex post facto justification of this or that invasion or annexation of another chunk of real estate deemed crucial to the great strategic goals of the imperial powers.

There were good reasons for invading Afghanistan, but building a secular, American-run network of schools throughout the country was not one of them.

For centuries, western imperialist adventures have been justified – at least to the credulous --  as civilizing missions. Without exception, these periods of zealous expansionism have ended in chaos and strife, not least for those unfortunate locals who cooperated with the imperial power but who were abandoned to their fate when it retired hurt from the unequal contest with nationalist insurgents.

How to extricate ourselves from an endless civil war in Afghanistan, without visiting further death and destruction on its people, should be the overarching aim of Western policy. How to do this by securing at least some sort of decent future for the young women and men who desperately want a better life than that being dreamt up for them by their fathers, and the Taliban, should be the preoccupation of Western policy-makers and commentators.

But one of the unintended and unwelcome consequences of the West’s dismal showing in Afghanistan might — as happened after Vietnam, Algeria, Uganda and all the other retreats from Empire — be to provide a refuge for millions of Afghans seeking the better life we rashly promised, but could not deliver for them in their homeland.

Photo by Flickr user elissapearl, used under a Creative Commons license.

Defence debate: Security about more than just hardware

by Bill Bowtell - 28 April 2009 4:44PM

In my op-ed in today’s Sydney Morning Herald, I wanted to concentrate on what we might call the opportunity costs of the very large equipment procurement programs that will be foreshadowed in the Defence White Paper.

It seems axiomatic to defence debate insiders that Australian taxpayers should accept that such programs will consume somewhere between 2% and 3% of GDP stretching into the indefinite future. But I am not sure the public will so meekly accept that other, more pressing, areas of domestic need should be subordinated to military procurement programs of the scale and scope being contemplated in the present debate.

The nature of the recent boom led many otherwise sensible people to conclude that we might afford both guns and butter, with something left over for our retirement. But its collapse has destroyed public and private wealth on a hitherto unimaginable scale.

The old guns or butter conundrum will again dominate public debate and argument about our defence priorities. So far, those who advocate the dramatic upgrading of our military forces have not made the case that their priorities should outweigh increasingly pressing domestic demand for such things as improved public health, renewal of our crumbling transport infrastructure and the consequences of a shift to a low-carbon economy.

I, for one, would prefer to see our rapidly diminishing wealth applied to redressing the neglect of our overseas aid development budget rather than equipping our forces to fight conflicts that, to my admittedly untrained eye, seem highly unlikely ever to eventuate.

No doubt, the White Paper will signal the beginning, not the end, of the important debate that has fascinated us on this blog for the past several weeks.

Photo by Flickr user chrissuderman, used under a Creative Commons license.

Quentin Bryce in Africa

by Bill Bowtell - 2 April 2009 1:33PM

At the Global Fund meeting in Caceres, Spain, I spoke to the Global Fund's Deputy Chair, Elizabeth Mataka from Zambia. Elizabeth is one of Africa's foremost leaders in the fight against AIDS and is the UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy on AIDS in Africa. Elizabeth has devoted her life to saving and improving the lives of women and girls affected by the pandemic.

She told me how delighted she had been to host our Governor-General, Quentin Bryce, on her recent visit to Lusaka, the Zambian capital. Elizabeth had taken Ms Bryce to visit a support centre for women  and girls in the poorest section of Lusaka; and then to a school for children orphaned by the pandemic.

'It was a foul day, pouring with rain, mud everywhere and the streets almost impassable,' she said.  'I expected her to cancel the visit but was astonished that she and her party were eager to go ahead with it.'

Elizabeth told me that the Governor-General had impressed the children and staff with her warmth and generosity, and that she had stayed at both facilities far longer than planned. 'The day was a great success, and her visit was very well reported in the Zambian media.'

How good it is that our Governor-General got to see real life as it is lived by so many people in Africa, for better and for worse. The crankily pompous conservative commentators who criticised the Governor-General's African visit would learn a lot if they spoke to Elizabeth Mataka. But why let any facts spoil a good rant?

The GFC and the fight against AIDS, TB and malaria

by Bill Bowtell - 1 April 2009 3:37PM

I'm in Caceres, Spain at a meeting of major donors to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. The meeting is reviewing how well the Global Fund is raising revenues to meet demand from recipient countries as they mobilise to combat the three deadly, and preventable, diseases.

But the onset of the global financial crisis has dominated discussions here. Will the big donor countries be as willing and able to maintain the momentum of the Fund's activities when their domestic economies are in such dire straits? The review meeting heard some good, and some bad, news.

In a major report delivered to the Caceres meeting, we learnt that since it was founded in 2002, the Global Fund has supported comprehensive prevention, treatment and care programs in 137 countries through investments of $US7.2 billion. By December 2008, 3.5 million people who would otherwise have died of AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in the past five years are alive as a result of Global Fund-supported programs. These programs meant that:

  • 2 million people were receiving ART (antiretroviral) therapy for HIV infection
  • 4.6 million people were provided with effective TB treatment
  • 70 million insecticide-treated bednets were distributed to protect families from malaria.

The bad news is that donors, including Australia, made it clear that further replenishment of the Global Fund at the levels seen in the last full year of the global economic boom is going to be uncertain at best. The best estimates presented to the meeting were that between 2008-10,  minimum global demand for programs to keep bringing down the prevalence of the three diseases would be $US13.5 billion, while projected revenues from all sources would be about $US9.5 billion, a shortfall of $US4 billion.

The tremendous achievements of the last six years were made only because large amounts of money were finally put behind workable and effective containment strategies. If this flow of funds is reduced, more people will contract the three diseases, and many more lives will be lost.

However severe the global financial crisis might be in the rich countries, in the poor countries, the crisis will become a question of life and death. $US4 billion is, in contrast to the massive stimulus packages underwritten by governments (much less the bonuses paid to bankers and corporate managers) simply peanuts. Like all who attended Caceres, I know where the money would be better spent.

Photo by Flickr user YoHandy, used under a Creative Commons license.

Pope's condom stance defies evidence

by Bill Bowtell - 19 March 2009 12:38PM

Pope Benedict’s statement, made prior to his current African tour, that the use of condoms could play no part in reducing the spread of the HIV/AIDS pandemic has been widely and justifiably condemned.

No dispassionate observer of the evidence accumulated over the 25 years of the HIV/AIDS pandemic could come to any other conclusion than that the promotion and use of condoms has prevented literally millions of young people from being infected with HIV and from great suffering and early death from AIDS.

By the late 1980s, the transmission of HIV was well-described. It was therefore clear how individuals might avoid infection, and how the general spread of HIV brought under control. The use of condoms reduced HIV transmission through vaginal and anal sex, and the use of clean needles and syringes reduced the spread among injecting drug users and recipients of transfusions and other medical procedures.

In countries (including Australia and many Asian nations) that implemented these simple preventive measures, rates of new HIV/AIDS infection plummeted. Where reactionary social and religious forces blocked the introduction of these policies (notably in Africa), rates of new HIV infection, and consequent death rates from AIDS, reached appallingly high levels.

Hardly surprisingly, monogamy, chastity and fidelity have not proven to be the foundations of effective HIV prevention policies in Africa or anywhere else.

The tragic consequences of the anti-condom policies first determined by John Paul II and restated in Africa by Benedict XVI, are clear for all to see. And those who most clearly understand the enormity of this disaster are the many outstanding Catholic priests, nuns, doctors, nurses, carers and laypeople who must care for the innocent victims of the Vatican’s intransigent persistence in error in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

Photo by Flickr user Ammar Abd Rabbo, used under a Creative Commons license.

The bizarre contortions of Quentin Bryce's critics

by Bill Bowtell - 10 March 2009 4:52PM

The head of state should protect and advance the national interest as defined by the national government.

From Albania to Zambia, from North Korea to North Dakota and from Palau to Panama, no patriotic politician, party or pundit could possibly disagree with such an unexceptional statement.

In a world of nation-states, heads of state are, well, heads of states. They represent their people to themselves and to the wider world and generally perform their state duties with dignity, warmth and style. At home, they should be gracious hosts to other heads of state and government, and courteous visitors when they themselves travel abroad.

Could there possibly be a country where the politics of a major party, or gaggle of pundits, could become so bizarrely contorted as to attack their head of state for representing the national interest when s/he travels abroad? Not for nothing is Australia sometimes referred to as Oz. More...

The 17th International AIDS Conference

by Bill Bowtell - 22 August 2008 10:19AM

I’m back in Sydney from the 17th International AIDS Conference held in Mexico City. International AIDS conferences are as far removed from earnest, worthy and dull scientific conferences as it is possible to imagine.

While serious science is still reported at these conferences, they are also a coming together of the international HIV/AIDS political movement that has done so much over two decades to forge a global consensus on how the HIV pandemic must be managed, contained and eventually reduced.

Over the two decades I have attended these gatherings, the once po-faced scientists have gradually become more adventurous, radical and More...

The Alexander Downer I know

by Bill Bowtell - 14 July 2008 11:03AM

I have known Alexander Downer for 32 years – since we joined the foreign service in 1976 in the aftermath of the 1975 dismissal of the Whitlam Government. We did not hit it off. Rather, throughout our training year we argued, abused and trashed each other at (tedious) length. The escalation of our conflict widened to encompass what became known later as the culture wars, the rights and wrongs of the libidinous 60s and every conceivable point of political difference between progress and reaction. It was tough, unremitting, wildly abusive and a lot of fun.

In all that year, I never knew Alex to shut up, take a backward step or not pay out as good as he got. So forgive me if I am less than sympathetic to Alex’s complaint that Peter Hartcher was somehow too personally critical of him in his recent Sydney Morning Herald commentary. God knows, Alex Downer was not the first Australian foreign minister to be bumptious, egomaniacal, headstrong, wilful and prone to regard his Prime Minister as an interfering impediment to the proper conduct of the nation’s foreign policy. But so what? In broad terms, Alex formulated and implemented the policy settings and orientation of his government, his party and those who backed and encouraged them. More...

Reader riposte: Indonesia AIDS funding

by Bill Bowtell - 27 June 2008 11:19AM

Dave Burrows from AIDS Project Management Group has this response to my post (my response follows):

I agree with Bill Bowtell that the German debt for health swap is an intelligent way to deal both with Third World debt and the need for global HIV funding. But it should perhaps be footnoted that the Indonesians in particular have not fared well with HIV grants from the Global Fund.

Despite winning 2 grants totalling US$73m, difficulties with management and transparency of funding and programming decisions have led to delays, reduction of projects and ultimately withdrawal of funds. A modest Round 1 five-year grant of US$7.8m began in June 2003 and by June 08 had only expended US$5.7m. The more ambitious $65m grant starting in June 2005 expended only $22m to date and more than $11m was removed from Phase 2 of the grant. (These figures are from the Indonesia files on the Global Fund website.) More...

Swapping debt for health in Indonesia

by Bill Bowtell - 25 June 2008 1:09PM

I'm in Jakarta to attend the ceremony to mark the conclusion of the first 'Debt2Health' swap between Indonesia, Germany and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. This innovative new form of development assistance financing involves the creditor (in this case Germany) forgiving a loan (Euro 50 million) owed to it by the debtor (Indonesia).

So far, so simple. But the twist is that Indonesia has then agreed to convert half of the foregone loan (Euro 25 million) into a no-strings contribution to the Global Fund to use in the fight against the three diseases. Indonesia thus benefits from a reduction in its debt burden, allowing more resources to be applied domestically to health and other sectors. More...

HIV/AIDS: The not-so munificent seven

by Bill Bowtell - 25 June 2008 9:35AM

President Bush may be blamed for many things, but not for his strong commitment to increasing dramatically US funding for the fight against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. Earlier this year, President Bush forged a bipartisan consensus to allocate $US50 billion over five years to the global fight against the three top preventable diseases. For the first time in the lamentable, disastrous history of the AIDS pandemic, the Bush AIDS funding package held out the promise of adequate funding vital if the spread of the pandemic is to be contained. 

But now, seven Republican senators threaten to derail the entire US AIDS funding Bill in the Senate. More...

Trust the science, not Piers Akerman

by Bill Bowtell - 12 June 2008 1:26PM

Commentator Piers Akerman inveighs against the usual gang of suspects on climate change in today's Sydney Daily Telegraph. The idea that the planet is heating up is 'anthropogenic global warming madness' dreamt up by Al Gore, who is 'making it up as he goes along'. Ross Garnaut, the author of the forthcoming report on emissions trading (and Lowy Institute board member)  is rechristened 'Ross MuGarnaut', the Mugabe of the new carbon dictatorship apparently about to be imposed on Australia by Kevin Rudd. Akerman goes on to assert that the scientific evidence for global warming should be equated with what he terms other notable failures of consensus science, including the Y2K bug, the 'prediction of global starvation in the 1960s' and the 'forecast of an AIDS pandemic made in the 1970s'.

Putting aside the fact that the first case of what was later identified as HIV/AIDS was not reported until 1981 in New York City, Akerman is wildly incorrect to claim science got the HIV/AIDS pandemic wrong. Since 1981, HIV/AIDS has infected nearly 60 million people. Over  25 million people have died from AIDS caused by HIV infection. Presently, some 35 million people are  infected with an incurable, often highly debilitating affliction. If this is not a pandemic realized, then Akerman might share with us his definition of the term.

As is demonstrably the case with global warming, science, not Akerman, was right about HIV/AIDS.

Japan's continuing commitment to the Global Fund

by Bill Bowtell - 28 May 2008 9:49AM

On 23 and 24 May, I attended a Symposium in Tokyo on the linkages between communicable diseases and human security, organized by the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Friends of the Global Fund Japan. It is one of two important meetings leading up to the forthcoming G8 meeting to be held in Hokkaido – the other being next week’s Japan-Africa summit meeting, which will bring 40 African heads of state and government to Tokyo. The Symposium was opened by Prime Minister Fukuda, who announced a new grant of $US560 million to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and MalariaMore...

Don't wait until HIV is a big problem in Indonesia

by Bill Bowtell - 26 March 2008 11:05AM

For over two decades, sensible HIV/AIDS policy-making has been hampered by the crippling intellectual orthodoxy that funding for HIV/AIDS programs should be applied only after it becomes a serious problem. This is nonsense of a superlatively high order stemming from the stranglehold that the caring and treating professions have come to exercise over public health policy-making. 

No-one begrudges the work of doctors, nurses, carers and researchers who have applied themselves unstintingly to the rolling policy and human disaster that is the AIDS pandemic. But in terms of creating a policy framework to prevent the spread of the AIDS epidemic, the caring, treating and researching professions have little to offer. More...

Good signs for US HIV/AIDS policy

by Bill Bowtell - 6 February 2008 1:48PM

Underneath the hullabaloo of the American presidential election, there are encouraging signs that a more pragmatic approach is emerging on the always vexed issue of America’s international and domestic HIV/AIDS policies. More...

Lowy staff talk about the year in books (part 2)

by Bill Bowtell - 17 December 2007 4:44PM

The war in Iraq is being accompanied by an equally vicious intellectual battle to lay the blame for the multiple disasters of the Bush Administration.  Last year, the heavy artillery was all one way from the representatives of the permanent government – Defense, the CIA and the State Department – as their interlocutors laid blame for the war at the feet of the Bush-Cheney crowd.

This year, however, two remarkable books laid bare the deep dysfunction within the two gigantic bureaucracies at the heart of the American system of government – the CIA and the Department of Defense.  As James Carroll in House of War: The Pentagon and the Disastrous Rise of American Power and Tim Weiner in Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA  powerfully argue, these two massive systems of patronage and power have radically reshaped the American republic and debauched the principles on which it was founded. More...

More on Australian foreign policy radicalism

by Bill Bowtell - 14 December 2007 3:00PM

In response to my post arguing Howard was a foreign policy radical, reader The Piping Shrike writes:

I think your assumptions on the Gorton-Keating years are wrong. It was American policy to make accommodations through détente with China and Russia as their failure in Indochina became clear. Australian foreign policy (including that of Whitlam's recognition of China just ahead of Nixon's) was to keep track with the US' more multilateral defensive turn.

Howard maintained its tracking with US foreign policy, but it was US foreign policy that was the aberration, namely its unilateralist lunge that you confuse with Australian foreign policy. Now US foreign policy is changing to accommodate to its loss of political leadership over climate change, and Australian foreign policy, as ever, is keeping track.

Howard was the foreign policy radical, not Rudd

by Bill Bowtell - 14 December 2007 8:09AM

If being 'radical' is defined as a wild deviation from a pre-existing “normal” state, then whether Mr Rudd’s foreign policy can be characterized as 'radical' as compared to Mr Howard’s simply depends on what “normal” Australian foreign policy settings might be, and determining if and when the radical deviation from them took place. By these criteria, it is Mr Howard, not Mr Rudd, who was the wild-eyed radical disrupter of the long-established norms of Australian foreign policy. More...

UNAIDS should be commended, not scolded

by Bill Bowtell - 21 November 2007 4:21PM

UNAIDS has published revised estimates of the size of the global HIV/AIDS pandemic. The new UNAIDS figures for 2007 put the number of annual new HIV infections at 2.5 million, a reduction of more than 40% from last year’s estimate. The worldwide total of people infected with HIV is now reported as 33 million, rather than last year’s estimate of approximately 40 million. These revisions stem from improved methodologies to measure the spread of the pandemic, especially in India and China.

Foreshadowing the UNAIDS report, the Washington Post on 19 November quoted the American author Helen Epstein as saying that the revision was evidence of a link between UNAIDS’  'alarmism' about the pandemic and its 'fundraising agenda'. Such comments yet again demonstrate the tedious politicisation of HIV/AIDS in the US. For over two decades, this increasingly puerile 'debate' has greatly disfigured and impeded a rational response to the pandemic. UNAIDS is to be congratulated, not criticized, for its continuing application of rigorous scientific method and principles to such an extraordinarily complex phenomenon. More...

Fighting HIV and TB in China (part 3)

by Bill Bowtell - 16 November 2007 11:40AM

After Xi’an, I arrived in Kunming to attend to the 16th Board meeting of the Global Fund, and the first ever Global Fund board meeting to be held in China.

The meeting took place only after a serious negotiation between the Fund and the Chinese government over travel restrictions the Chinese government still places on HIV-positive visitors. The Global Fund made it clear that it could not hold the meeting in China unless the Chinese government reviewed its restrictive policies. The Chinese government assured the Fund that it would undertake such a review, and that the present discriminatory arrangements will be abolished well before the 2008 Beijing Olympics. This will bring China into line with general global practice, leaving the US as the only large country to maintain this unnecessarily discriminatory provision in its immigration laws. More...

Fighting HIV and TB in China (part 2)

by Bill Bowtell - 14 November 2007 9:50AM

After our visit to rural Shaanxi province, the Global Fund delegation visited the largest gay bar in Xi’an, Shaanxi's capital. The fact that we visited the bar at all, and as part of a program organized by the provincial and national governments, demonstrates how far China has come in acknowledging social realities. It was a long way from my previous visit to Kunming in 1989, when the then provincial governor claimed HIV/AIDS would never be a problem in China because the revolution had abolished the social evils of homosexuality, prostitution and drug addiction.

AIDS display at Xi'an gay bar

At the bar we met the dedicated team of full-time staff and volunteers who use the bar as a base from which to educate the local gay community about HIV/AIDS, undertake testing and counseling, and provide support services of all kinds. Global Fund assistance helps this team to undertake their valuable work. More...

Fighting HIV and TB in China

by Bill Bowtell - 13 November 2007 10:11AM

I’ve been invited to China as a guest of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria to observe the first Global Fund board meeting, to be held in Kunming. Over the coming days, I'll provide some observations and photos of my visit.

On the way to Kunming, the Fund invited me to visit Shaanxi province (population 37 million, of whom 61% are living in poverty). Global Fund support for provincial TB programs began in April 2003 and assisted Shaanxi province to establish a universal system for patient identification, testing and treatment under an integrated TB control plan.  Between April 2003 and June 2007, 326,588 cases of suspected pulmonary TB were tested and 117,578 active TB patients were identified. There is a cure rate of 90%.

We called on Dr Zhang Ding Chao and his team in the Yongle town hospital, central Shaanxi province, for a briefing on their efforts to control, contain and reduce tuberculosis. The gulf that has opened up between the booming cities and the more distant provincial centres was brought home to me by the very dilapidated and old clinic facilities in which the meeting took place. But with Global Fund assistance, Dr Zhang has implemented a comprehensive TB program in Zhen’an county.  By the end of 2007, 8,900 cases of suspected pulmonary TB were tested and 938 cases of active TB identified.  The county has also integrated TB and AIDS programs into routine health care services.

Dr Zhang is director of TB services for Yongle town and district. He briefed members of the Global Fund delegation on how TB funds provided by the Global Fund were being spent in the remote village of Wangjiaping.

More...

Selected Interpreter posts also appear in:

 
Business Spectator Caing online The Diplomat
 

Keep up-to-date with The Interpreter through:

iPhone App   iPhone App

RSS Feed   The Interpreter RSS Feed

Email Digest  

To receive a digest of posts from The Interpreter via email, enter your email address:

Receive a daily digest ->
Receive a weekly digest ->

Preview   |   Powered by FeedBlitz

Interpreting the Aid Review

This is the archive of a Lowy Institute blog which ran from January to April of 2011. It was published to debate the Gillard Government's independent aid review, which was then in its research and consultation phase. We offer this archive as a service to researchers and the general public.