WASHINGTON - If there is one foreign-policy issue on which the Bush administration is even more isolated internationally than in its decision to invade and occupy Iraq, it is on what critics call its ongoing war against the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) which supports the reproductive health rights of women around the world.

The administration, which insists that UNFPA supports forced abortions in parts of China despite repeated denials by the agency and a 2002 State Department report that found no evidence to sustain the charge, is currently pursuing the war on two fronts, according to its critics in Congress.

On the one hand, it is threatening to withhold U.S. aid to other UN and private agencies if they do not break their ties with UNFPA.

At the same time, it is continuing its effort to persuade other governments to back away from the "Cairo Consensus," the program of action endorsed by 179 countries, including the U.S., at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) that asserted that promoting women's reproductive rights and services is central to reducing poverty and promoting economic development.

At a meeting of Western Hemisphere countries in Puerto Rico next weekend, the U.S. delegation is expected to push for the removal of references in the final communiqué to "reproductive health services," which it considers to be code for supporting abortion, and the insertion of language asserting the rights of parents to make all decisions regarding adolescents' sexual and reproductive health.

In March, similar U.S. efforts at a preparatory conference in Santiago, Chile, proved unsuccessful, as Washington's delegation found itself completely isolated when the 39 other delegations reaffirmed and even expanded their commitment to the 1994 Consensus.

A number of U.S. lawmakers who have supported UNFPA have expressed outrage at the administration's latest tactics. In a letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell Friday, four Democratic representatives called for an urgent explanation for the administration’s alleged threats to de-fund the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.N. Children's Fund (UNICEF) if they continued pooling their funds in joint initiatives with UNFPA - threats that were said to have been conveyed at recent informal meetings of the two agencies' executive boards.

"At a time when we need the UN more than ever, the will of the right wing is getting in the way," said New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney, one of the lawmakers who signed the letter. "In its continued 'War on Women,' the Bush administration is doing the right wing's bidding - telling WHO and UNICEF whom they can meet with, whom they can include on a panel and whom they can talk to, all at risk of losing funding."

The purported threats, on which the State Department Monday had no comment, are being taken seriously in the wake of the administration's decision late last month to deny funding for an early-June meeting of the Washington-based Global Health Council (GHC) for the first time in 30 years after anti-abortion groups claimed that the Council's promotion of "reproductive rights" and sex education was inconsistent with Bush's policies.

In an uncharacteristically tough speech, the Council's normally mild-mannered director, Nils Daulaire, accused the administration of politicizing public-health issues. "It is the politics of health - more correctly, the exploitation of sensitive global health issues for domestic political purposes - that has kept (the administration) away," he charged.

The latest controversy comes less than one month before the July 15 deadline for Bush to decide what to do with the $34 million Congress approved for UNFPA this year. Since 2002, he has refused to provide any of the money Congress has appropriated for the agency, the world's largest international source of funding for population and reproductive health programs whose annual budget is nearly $400 million.

Working with WHO and UNICEF, UNFPA offers support to developing countries dealing with such problems as the spread of HIV/AIDS, maternal mortality and prenatal care, as well as family planning and other reproductive-health programs.

At the GHC meeting earlier this month, UNFPA's director general, Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, announced that the agency would focus more efforts on combating child marriage which she said violates the rights of tens of millions of girls by threatening their health, restricting their education, and limiting their social and economic opportunities to determine their own fate.

Historically, the United States has been UNFPA's biggest donor, but Bush has blocked recent U.S. contributions by arguing that the general support the agency gives China's Ministry of Health, including computers, could provide indirect support for forced abortion and sterilization policies which persist in some parts of China. The administration cited a 20-year-old law that bans U.S. aid for organizations that involved in such activities. It was the first time the law had been used against UNFPA.

Maloney, as well as many other lawmakers, including a number of Republicans, deplored that decisions, particularly in light of the State Department's conclusion that UNFPA's activities in China were, if anything, directed at discouraging coercive practices. "You have to remember that this all started because the administration did not tell the truth about the good work UNFPA is doing in China," she said. "They put millions of women and children around the world at risk because of that."

"This is yet another alarming example of how the Bush administration's record of putting politics ahead of science can cost lives," said California Rep. Henry Waxman, who also signed the letter.

But the threat to reduce or cut funding from WHO and UNICEF is seen as even more serious by some. "This represents nothing less than a global assault on women's health," said California Rep. Barbara Lee. "Despite a wealth of scientific data that links reduced rates of HIV transmission to comprehensive reproductive health care programs, this administration seems intent on turning back women's health to the Dark Ages."

At the same time, activist groups are voicing confidence that the administration's efforts at the upcoming meeting of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) to weaken a reaffirmation of the Cairo Consensus will again fall short.

Not only did the same governments as will be present in Puerto Rico resist U.S. pressure to water down the Consensus at the March meeting of the ad hoc Committee on Population and Development in Santiago, but the administration's defeat marked the third in a series of regional meetings that included Europe and Asia as well. In each case, Washington found itself without any allies.

Nor does the administration's position represent the view of most U.S. citizens, according to Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), a group that has led the fight for reproductive rights. "It's clear that the administration's position does not reflect the opinions of the American people," said Allie Stickney, PPFA's vice president. "Thousands of Americans along with their city and state officials have called on our government to stay true to the promise of Cairo. Yet the United States has repeatedly shown that it's willing to sacrifice women's health and rights to placate just a handful of anti-family planning extremists."

PPFA is the U.S. chapter of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), one of a number of NGOs which has been denied U.S. funding under the administration-backed "global gag rule," a law that bans U.S. aid to public health clinics, public agencies, and other organizations that provide information about abortions or lobbies their governments to ease anti-abortion legislation.

© Copyright 2004 OneWorld.net

###