Editorial, Opinion Piece Discuss Possible Actions On Global Health, Africa Policy Under Trump Administration
The Lancet: President Trump
“…The winners in Trump’s America were likely to be the defense industry, oil and energy, private prisons, and pharmaceutical manufacturers. Not health. What should be the response of the public health community? Document and project the impact of Trump’s policies. Identify policy alternatives. And mobilize opposition. … [W]e must admit that we now have no idea what he has in mind for health care. … Advances for sexual and reproductive health and rights are likely to falter. … His skepticism about the value of U.S. leadership suggests that his nation’s commitment to global health and development could be at risk. … Now is not the time to rail against the election of Trump. Instead, the objective must be to organize, and to use evidence to promote a clear pro-health political agenda for the U.S., domestically and globally. The goal must be to hold President Trump accountable to that agenda. And we should also learn an important lesson — the health community needs to listen harder and more respectfully to the white working class of America. Their gradual but relentless social exclusion contributed to Trump’s election” (11/19).
AllAfrica: Africa: How Might Trump Change Africa Policy?
Herman J. Cohen, former assistant secretary of state for African affairs in the George H.W. Bush administration
“There is already much speculation as to President Donald J. Trump’s likely policy toward Africa. During the campaign, the Trump team did not speak very much about foreign policy in general, and said almost nothing about Africa. … The Trump call for ‘America first’ may mean less money spent to help Africa and more money devoted to rebuilding the United States. On the other hand, since many U.S.-based global companies have been making the case that foreign assistance helps build the infrastructure needed for expanding their markets into Africa, the Trump administration’s pro-business approach may mean continuing to provide this aid, which makes up less than one percent of our overall budget. … There is little doubt that PEPFAR will be sustained, but the Trump administration might decide to scrutinize MCC because of budgetary restrictions. … The Trump administration would do well to maintain [Power Africa and Feed the Future, because] these two excellent programs … are good for American national interests…” (11/17).