Subject: The Weekly GAB - Friday, January 22, 2016
From: "USGLC GAB" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:49:34 -0500

The Weekly GAB - Friday, January 22, 2016
U.S. Global Leadership Coalition | www.usglc.org

Campaign 2016

WISTV (NBC - COLUMBIA)
Clinton Talks About Guantanamo Bay, Terrorism, and Security Threats [VIDEO]<http://www.wistv.com/story/31018126/clinton-talks-about-guantanamo-bay-terrorism-and-security-threats-in-part-2-of-exclusive-interview> | Charles Molineaux
[2:01] "Well, here's what I believe. I believe that America has to use every tool at our disposal, to exercise what I call 'smart power.' That means, of course, the strongest defense that we can have and I believe that's imperative. It means using diplomacy. And it means using development and cultural and values outreach."

POLITICO
Trump's 19th Century Foreign Policy<http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-foreign-policy-213546?o=1> | Thomas Wright
Trump has thought long and hard about America's global role and he knows what he wants to do. There is virtually no chance that he would "tack back to the center" and embrace a conservative internationalist foreign policy. If he did get elected president, he would do his utmost to liquidate the U.S.-led liberal order by ending America's alliances, closing the open global economy, and cutting deals with Russia and China. He would find this hard to do, not least because the entire U.S. foreign policy establishment would be opposed to him and he needs people to staff his National Security Council, State Department and Defense Department. But there is real power in the presidency, especially if there is clear guidance about the chief executive's wishes. In any event, the mere fact that the American people would have elected somebody with a mandate to destroy the U.S.-led order might be sufficient to damage it beyond repair.

THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE
Kasich's Misguided Foreign Policy<http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/kasichs-misguided-foreign-policy/> | Daniel Larison
Kasich is the only current governor still in the race whose constituents still like him, which puts him in the unique position of being able to draw attention to his record back home without having it blow up in his face. He has been emphasizing both his executive experience in Ohio and the importance of cooperating with the other party, and in contrast to his main rivals Kasich does not usually rely on angry or doom-laden rhetoric. That creates the impression that Kasich is a more responsible and sober politician than his competitors, but as we can see his foreign policy is anything but that.

Who's in the News

AGRIPULSE
The Importance of Public-Policy Partnerships in Global Food Security<http://www.agri-pulse.com/The-importance-of-public-private-partnerships-in-global-food-security-01202016.asp>
Senator Amy Klobuchar, Senior Senator from Minnesota
As a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I know how important food security is to our nation and world. The U.S. government's commitment to global food security is not just a moral imperative. It's also critical for enhancing economic growth domestically and promoting national security. And the solutions are complex, requiring innovative thinking and innovative partnerships. I saw the importance of public-private partnerships firsthand when I traveled to Africa. I visited Faffa Foods in Ethiopia, a leading supplier of baby food in the country. Hundreds of African food companies - including Faffa Foods - have received assistance through USAID and Partners for Food Solutions (PFS), a nonprofit program jointly founded by two Minnesota companies - General Mills and Cargill - and other food companies to share technology and expertise.

GEORGE W. BUSH INSTITUTE

The Case for American Internationalism<http://www.bushcenter.org/catalyst/leadership/the-case-for-american-internationalism.html>

Former Arizona Senator Jon Kyl and Former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman. Both are Co-chairs of the American Internationalism Project at the American Enterprise Institute.

Since the end of World War II, the United States has worked with its allies to nurture and maintain an international environment that has expanded security, prosperity, and human rights throughout the globe. As new challenges to this system emerge, however, many across America have wondered whether the benefits of international leadership outweigh the costs.

CNN
John Kerry is in a Diplomatic Groove, Bit It Might Not Last<http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/john-kerry-davos-iran-prisoners-deal/> | Elise Labott
In a welcome respite from a torrent of Republican criticism over Iran, Syria and other controversial foreign policies, Kerry will arrive at the World Economic Forum on Wednesday ready to bask in the glow of an international crowd that is more supportive of his diplomacy than are his domestic critics. He has long traveled to the annual Switzerland gathering, schmoozing with the world's elite and debating weighty global and economic issues as a senator and, as secretary of state, representing the popular voice of the United States in a world gone awry.

Development & Diplomacy

DEVEX

Why 2016 is the Year to Shake Up Humanitarian Funding<https://www.devex.com/news/why-2016-is-the-year-to-shake-up-humanitarian-funding-87640>

Peter Maurer, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross

People living through armed conflicts need infrastructure and services that will last, and the last thing on their mind is which budget line applies. To respond to people's needs, humanitarian action has evolved from a temporary fix to a long-term safety net. Humanitarian organizations like the ICRC, are often sustaining vital services like health, urban water supply, power systems and even prisons, over the long-term. But we are doing this on short-term humanitarian budgets. Moreover, as conflicts last longer, development gains in fields like public health and education are halted or rapidly reversed. With this in mind, the understanding of humanitarian assistance as an emergency stopgap, is obsolete.

THE HILL

The Rising Importance of Food to America's National Security<http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/homeland-security/266549-the-rising-importance-of-food-to-americas-national>

Representative Larry Combest, Former Congressman from Texas, and Principal at Combest Sell & Associates

As the former chairman of both the Agriculture and Intelligence Committees, I was pleased to see the importance of agriculture discussed in the context of our homeland and national security. Negroponte articulated very well the exigency of the situation we face, the implications for homeland and global security, and even the moral imperative that somehow seems to get lost in the shuffle: Are we or are we not going to do what it takes to feed the world's people?

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Kerry Calls for 30 Percent Hike in International Aid For Refugees<http://news.yahoo.com/kerry-calls-30-percent-hike-international-aid-refugees-112622238.html>

Kerry told the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that the US wanted to "increase by 30 percent the response to UN humanitarian funding appeals". The State Department said this call would amount to an increase in international humanitarian aid for refugees from $10 billion (9.2 billion euros) in 2015 to $13 billion in 2016. Kerry said President Barack Obama would host a summit on refugees at the UN General Assembly in New York later this year.

Politics & Foreign Policy

KAISER FAMILY FOUNDATION
Americans' Views on the U.S. Role in Global Health<http://kff.org/global-health-policy/poll-finding/americans-views-on-the-u-s-role-in-global-health/>
Bianca DiJulio, Associate Director, Mira Norton, Survey Analyst, and Mollyann Brodie, Executive Director, of the Public Opinion and Survey Research Program
Two-thirds of Americans (65 percent) overall and majorities of Democrats, independents and Republicans alike, say that the United States should play at least a major role in world affairs, including roughly one in five overall (18 percent) who say the U.S. should take the leading role. However, when it comes to global health efforts specifically, about half (53 percent) say the U.S. government is already doing enough to improve health for people in developing countries, and nearly half (46 percent) feel that the U.S. is doing more than its fair share compared to other wealthy countries. In addition, most Americans prefer a collaborative international approach in global health efforts over the U.S. acting alone, and this sentiment has increased over the past several years. The survey also finds a general skepticism on the part of the American people when it comes to the effectiveness of global health spending, with seven in ten saying the "bang for the buck" of U.S. spending in this area is only fair or poor, and more than half believing that spending more on global health efforts won't lead to meaningful progress (a share that has grown since 2012).

NEW YORK TIMES
Obama's Goal to Wipe Out Malaria May be a Dream Too Far<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/18/us/politics/obamas-goal-to-wipe-out-malaria-may-be-a-dream-too-far.html?_r=1> | Gardiner Harris
The [President's Malaria Initiative] accounts for a significant portion of global spending on anti-malaria efforts, which reached $2.5 billion in 2014. The United States government is responsible for about half of the total, and about half of America's spending comes from the president's initiative. Despite undeniable progress, serious challenges remain. Malaria deaths have fallen by about two-thirds since 2000 - in large measure because more than half of Africa's population now sleeps under mosquito nets, compared with just 2 percent in 2000 - and 6.2 million lives have been saved. Even so, last year the world had an estimated 214 million new malaria cases and 438,000 deaths. Of those fatalities, 91 percent were in Africa.

THE PROVIDENCE JOURNAL
Letter to the Editor: America Should Boost Foreign Aid<http://www.providencejournal.com/article/20160119/OPINION/160119211> | Lydia Pollard
The average American believes that 25 percent of the federal budget goes toward foreign aid programs and that it should be lowered to about 10 percent. In reality, it's only 1 percent. Because Americans think much more is spent on foreign aid, there is little pressure placed on Congress to try and increase funding. This allows certain politicians to try to further reduce the foreign aid budget. Reducing global poverty actually improves national security and creates U.S. jobs. If more Americans were aware of the benefits of funding foreign-aid programs, as well as how little is spent, would this become more of a hot button issue?

<http://www.facebook.com/USGLC><http://twitter.com/usglc><http://www.youtube.com/CUSGE