Where is the surprise, I ponder. Essentially the flow of “aid” or assistance from rich countries is in two parts of government money: channeled through charities and NGOs or partial subsidies of the pharmaceutical companies, or through direct research and development money from private companies.

Cures for known diseases are not a big money-maker for the pharmaceutical companies. Medications and preventative materials are old, tested goods and “generic” merchandise. Patents and other intellectual property rights have long expired for medications for malaria and the like, and thus from a business point of view, those products are either generic or very low profit. Moreover, planners sit in air-conditioned offices of modern cities, sip bottled water and pay the weekly wage of an African patient for a triple cappuccino and a piece of bread. Their daily dilemma is to choose between two different luxuries to pacify their boredom. Worries about basic needs such as clean water, sanitation or inoculation for locally “eradicated” diseases is a remote concern in, say, Copenhagen or Atlanta. Thus the focus is on fame and fortune--if a miracle drug is found for HIV/AIDS, heart attack, cancer or other diseases, there is a large, rich customer base in high-stress, urban living areas.

Continue »

The Current Discussion: A U.S. military tribunal court has convicted Osama bin Laden's driver Salim Hamdan of providing material support for terrorism after detaining him for nearly seven years. Is this a step forward or a step back in the war or terror?

This is hardly an event or a milestone in a murky process. There is not enough verifiable information available to make a fair assessment of events, personalities and circumstances. Perhaps Mr. Hamdan is guilty; it’s also possible that he was just a clueless grunt and a daily wage earner, in his daily job of moving a madman from one cave to another mud hut village. The concepts of terrorism, civilisation clash, or freedom fries might have been as relevant to him as nanophysics, writing computer programs or Chinese poetry! Who knows?

Continue »

A contrarian I might be. But I am all for finding a place and a power "pole" for another super power and changing the current structure of world power to a multi-polar world order, for the reason that, and as evidence suggests, the era of post-Cold War period has not been stable.

Continue »

The Current Discussion: What's the next likely target of Russia's reassertion of power?

In the first reading of the tea leaves, we can recall the famous line from the White House-- all options are on the table. However, the options have different meanings to different countries around the world.

Continue »

The Current Discussion: Will Pakistan be better or worse off after Musharraf?

A forecast of Pakistan's political future can be best framed in the memorable words of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: It is a mix of "known unknowns" and "unknown unknowns," this being a predictable pattern ever since the inception of Pakistan.

Continue »

The Current Discussion: In their campaign, should Barack Obama and running mate Joseph Biden advocate a clean break in U.S. foreign policy, or should they rely on continuity and experience?

America’s polarized party politics of the last decade is a churned cocktail of often-conflicting ideology and erroneous ideals that, in turn, have damaged America’s national interests and its world standing. Both parties raced to come up with new ideas and fill the post-Cold War vacuum, set a direction, define an ideology, and chart a new course for America. In this confusion, the master plan process was influenced by skewed and narrow visions, spun by foreign lobbies, or hijacked for acrimonious purposes.

Continue »