Let's stop giving China foreign aid

Yes, it gets it — a few billion a year, in fact. Some European countries, and Japan, are further down the road than the U.S. is in cutting off the gravy train to Beijing.

Here's why. It's not just that China's doing well enough not to need it, in many cases, the money it gets is less to go to Africa.

"I think the milestone that China is now the second largest economy, arguably, I would say that it's no longer a developing country with the likes of sub-Saharan Africa," Dr. Jack C. Chow said in an interview. "Having money from the Global Fund going to China really detracts and depletes that mission of helping people in the poorest of countries." ...

Chowwas the lead U.S. negotiator in talks that set up the Geneva-based Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, a major funder of health programs.

Beyond that, this is like foreign aid to Israel, which allows it to spend more money on settlements. The money is fungible.

Let's contrast Chow to the claims of "panda hugger" and former ambassador to China Robert Zoellick:

The World Bank defends its assistance to China, saying it enables the bank to work with Beijing on climate change and projects in sub-Saharan Africa.

"Sometimes there's a simplistic view that there should just be the developed countries and the very poorest countries," the bank's president, Robert Zoellick, said recently in Beijing. "But that would run exactly against ... the changes in the world economy, where the role of the emerging economies are to support demand, to take on responsibilities as stakeholders with the environment, to help support other poor countries."

It's another argument for "engagement," and it doesn't fly.

Hypocrisy alert: U.S. and Chinese foreign aid

CIA head Michael Hayden says is China is “have not yet stepped up to the responsibility of a major power” by, in essence “bribing” southeast Asian countries with foreign aid in exchange for U.N. votes. Translation coming after Hayden’s comments:

Chinese communist leaders… so far have failed to understand “they actually have some responsibility for the maintenance of the global system,” the Washington Times quoted Hayden as saying in an interview.

“When you go and essentially corrupt an island nation in the South Pacific with massive infusions of aid no matter how appropriately or inappropriately it will be used, and you strangle nascent democracies in their crib by doing so just so you can get that island nation's vote in the General Assembly, that's pursuing it for a very narrow base,” Hayden said.

“If you want to be a great power, you’ve got be thinking more broadly, you cannot be acting just on those kind of narrow considerations,” he said.

First, note the source… the conservative media mouthpiece horse’s ass for the Beltway.

Now, the “translation.” What Hayden means is that China is irresponsible for not supporting the American version of the global system. And, of course, we established our version by … massive amounts of foreign aid for … 2002-03 U.N. votes on Iraq.

Better than a $3 federal tax check-off for presidential elections

Since the corrosive power of political money will probably have both the Republican and Democratic presidential nominees in 2008 opt out of federal campaign financing,

And, since we are dead last among developed nations in the percentage of gross national product our government devotes to foreign aid,

Why not …

Have a $3 tax check-off box on our federal tax returns for foreign aid?