We frequently hear discussions about the fact that media outlets do not pay attention to the conflict in Congo. However, this reflection does not make the media talk more about it, the deadliest conflict since World War II. It is an absurd situation whose consequence is the absolute silence about the 1,000 daily deaths resulting from starvation or epidemics caused by war.
In 2003, after four years of a civil war that involved eight countries, a government was shaped in Kinshasa. However, all the war lords, turn into politicians, preserved their militias and do not hesitate to resort to violence in order to stay in power. In this deadly game, there is one particularly bothering card: the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, a group of Rwandan rebels whose roots are in the hutu extremists who perpetrated the Rwandan genocide. Its presence in Congo offers neighboring Rwanda a pretext to invade its neighbor. It has already done it twice and it was about to do it again in April. Such an action would definitely destabilize the fragile Congo. In spite of everything, mainstream the media refuses to pay attention to this war.
However, there are solutions for the Democratic Republic of Congo. It is necessary to create a National Congolese Army and pressure the governments of Congo and Rwanda, both dependent on international assistance, to promote a transition process taking advantage of financial assistance. As we can see, Africa is increasingly drawing attention. It is the duty of mass media to talk about the issue to trigger a true mobilization.

A year ago, when I suggested Tony Blair and Gordon Brown to establish a Commission for Africa, I expected in secret a political success, open up a public debate about the greatest problem of our time. The success or failure of our efforts greatly would depend upon the will and capacity of the African governments to rule effectively and tackle corruption.
The debate about this matter had extraordinary proportions and went on during the G-7 meeting. The national discussion allowed to define the terms of the debate among the leaders. At this point, most of the G-7 countries are willing to allocate 0.7% of their budget for development aid. However, it has not been possible yet to ensure doubling such assistance since the Canadians, Japanese, and mainly the Americans, have failed to commit themselves to do it. The Prime Minister, Live 8 and the coalitions against poverty should put pressure on these countries. A fair trade is also needed. Currently, subsidies and protectionism in the rich countries are ruining Africa, which only accounts for 2% of the world trade.
Blair should reject today any commitment with Canada, United States and Japan. He should cancel the debt, double the assistance for development, and reform world trade under conditions in favor of democracy and fight against corruption. Remember that those who demand this kind of assistance are the African commissioners of the Commission for Africa. The organizations are influencing upon the debate.
Unfortunately, those who tell us that our action is useless are unable to propose something else.

Different reports from experts who are examining the blights on Africa showed similar conclusions: Africa needs more investments to combat hunger, poverty and disease, and these investments should be mainly financed by the rich countries. Europe has begun to do it but the United States should follow this action. Yet, the White House is reluctant. The investment priorities in Africa are in four areas:
 Health, major problem in Africa since the continent must fight AIDS, malaria and other deadly diseases. Clinics, equipment and doctors are required.
 Education is also essential. The lack of teachers in Africa is huge.
 Agriculture, extremely unproductive because the Africans lack of basic investments.
 And finally the necessary infrastructures, such as water-distillers or power plants to electrify the rural areas.
These four problems can be solved. The Commission for Africa of Tony Blair recommends that international assistance be doubled for 2010 and tripled for 2015. This accounts for a sum of 16 cents for every 100 dollars of the GDP for the rich countries in 2010 and 22 cents in 2015. But today, every 100 dollars of the GDP, the United States allocates 3 cents to aid Africa and usually it is to pay the American consultants in those countries. This weekend, the G-8 countries decided to cancel the debt of 18 countries and reimburse the amounts owed to credit institutions. But to do that, the United States wants to use the money allocated to other aid programs, something that if is confirmed, would be an offence.
It is impossible to aid Africa as long as the United States decides to allocate 500 billion dollars to its army and only 3 billion to Africa. In this regard, George W. Bush has to be pressured.

Genocides (two in ten years), wars and insurgencies have distressed Africa since the days of hope for independence. Today, the Jihad combatants multiply in that continent. They are in two oil-producing countries (Nigeria and Algeria). Out of 400 foreign combatants captured in Iraq, 35% came from Africa.
Economically paralysed, many African countries lose grounds. This led Tony Blair to turn Africa into the focus of the British chairmanship of the G-8. Twenty-eight million Africans have died as a result of AIDS and the diseases linked to poverty take the lives of 500 African children per hour. At the beginning of the millennium, the UN promised to reduce poverty 50% in 2015 but the experts feel that it will take more time. Paul Wolfowitz also turned Africa into the focus of his five-years term as president of the World Bank. Blair wants the rich countries to double their assistance to the African countries and cancel Sub-Saharan Africa’s debt. However, it is difficult that the United States implements this option since it has a huge deficit and it is highly indebted due to the war in Iraq. That is why, George W. Bush promised 674 billion dollars but they were funds already allocated by the Congress to assist Ethiopia and Eritrea.
At the same time, Ethiopia is mobilizing troops to assist Darfur but the forces of the African Union cannot move due to an absurd conflict between the European Union and NATO to determine which of the two will transport the troops. Besides, the deployed forces by the African Union are insignificant compared to the size of the territory. South Africa cannot deploy many troops since 40% of its army is HIV-positive. In the interim, there is no coordination in the efforts of the European Union and NATO.
The United States does not seem to be worried about these facts and George W. Bush repeats that there are no links between terrorism and poverty. However, NATO commander-in-chief, General James Jones, frequently visits Africa to create troops to ensure the security of the continent. In order for this measure to be effective, the budget has to be increased 100 million dollars. This is the cost of an hour of occupation in Iraq.

I thank everyone here. Welcome to the White House. I want to express my gratitude to the five presidents who are with us today: President Mogae of Botswana, President Kufuor of Ghana, President Guebuza of Mozambique, President Pohamba of Namibia and President Tandja of Niger, five great patriots, democrats and friends.
All the presidents gathered here represent countries that have organized democratic elections this year. What a great assertion of how important democracy is for the African continent! We all have the vital commitment of promoting democracy and progress in that continent. In order to achieve it, we must encourage a mutually beneficial trade exchange. That’s the direction of the law regarding economic growth and opportunities in Africa. By virtue of that law, the African States can get more access to our market by expressing their undertaking in favor of an economic and political reform, respecting the Human Rights, removing the commercial barriers, consolidating the property rights and giving priority to the law, exactly what the leaders of these five nations are doing.
Due to the success of that law, I have, on two occasions, promulgated measures that have consolidated its completion and extended its advantages for a long time. Last year, U.S. imports coming from the countries favored by that law were increased in 88% and non-oil imports in 22%. It is out of that market opening that wealth is produced. And it is interesting to note that during this same period of time, U.S. exports to Sub-Saharan Africa were increased in 25%. In other words, this is a two-way street. That law generates advantages for both Americans and Africans and it is important for our compatriots to know that. In December, I announced that 37 African countries could enjoy the advantages of that law.
Simultaneously, the United States are intensifying its efforts to reduce hunger, to reduce the debt, to fight diseases in Africa. We are developing the Millenium Challenge Account and I have informed that the United States will contribute nearly $674 million additional dollars to cover the urgent humanitarian needs in Africa. On Saturday, we also informed about an agreement established among the G-8 member industrial countries with a view to cancel $40 000 million dollars off the debt faced by 18 of the poorest countries in the world, of which 14 are located in Africa. We’re also carrying out anti-AIDS programs. This is all but an example of the initiatives we are taking with the purpose of helping African leaders carry democracy, prosperity and hope to their peoples.
One more time, I am honored to have you here. Thank you for having come. God bless you all.

I feel happy with my visit. My relations with Vladimir Putin are solid. I was one of the world leaders to visit him after he came to power. Of course, there are differences between us, but that’s normal in international politics. Relationships between Russia and Great Britain are good and we will continue to strengthen them. Europe has undergone difficult times but it remains united and will keep growing despite current hardships and pending issues. Europe will go on and my country will be involved in the movement.
We have already defined the Russian-European cooperation framework. When the Russian-EU summit be held in London in October, I would like each one of us to make specific decisions in relation to economy, exchange development and the fight against drug trafficking. During the G-8 summit that will take place from July 6 to 8, we want to put forth the issue of the climatic change and the cancellation of the African debt. There is much we expect from Russia as future leading country of the Group.
World War II was won because of the links between Russia and Great Britain. All those who have studied Churchill’s life know it. Without the East front victory, the allies would not have succeeded. I think the UN will become more and more important. Reforms are essential, but that organization is very useful. There have been differences about Iraq, but the UN has a crucial role to play concerning the future of that country.

First of all, Russia depends on its own citizens, who, when voting, decide the way in which their country will live. Russia also depends on its political leaders and to a greater extent on the political circles that propose projects to the people. Additionally, Russia depends on the world prices for energy sources, which are its main export item and the staple of its budget. Likewise, the country depends on Europe, which is its main customer in the energy sector.
Europe is not only Russia’s major trade partner, but also an example to the Russians as regards culture and daily life. At the same time, I believe that Russia, though to a lesser extent, also depends on the U.S. policy.

We do not celebrate Independence Day, we celebrate Russia’s Day: a holyday. Our independence must not be questioned, nobody does. Fifteen years ago now, we lived in a sovereign State, quite a short time for a country like ours. A border separates us from Ukraine, but we are together like good neighbors, like bride and groom. That’s how we must think.
We must learn to live together and resolve our problems. We are eternal partners, just as Yushchenko said. May nobody doubt about it. A strong Ukraine is vital. The change of government that took place here has proved that we must understand each other better. This is a process that, if objective, won’t be painful. Sometimes we quarrel and sometimes we are all right. We want changes but only if they are well-oriented.