France under pressure to stop $9.7m of USAID contraceptives being destroyed
The Guardian reported this month that Donald Trump's administration planned to destroy $9.7m of contraceptives held in a Belgium warehouse which could be moved to France for incineration. They are mostly long-acting contraceptives such as IUDs and birth control implants which had been bought under public health programmes run by the US Agency for International Development and were probably intended for women in Africa.
A US state department spokesperson told Agence France-Presse this week that 'a preliminary decision was made to destroy' certain birth control products from 'terminated Biden-era USAID contracts'.
Trump's administration dismantled USAID, the country's foreign aid armbody, in January.
The spokesperson said the destruction would cost $167,000 and 'no HIV medications or condoms are being destroyed'.
The contraceptives, stored in a warehouse in Geel in Belgium, were reportedly planned to be incinerated in France, although there has been no confirmation of this by France. France and Belgium are under pressure to prevent any destruction.
The French health ministry said in a statement: 'We are following this situation closely and we support the will of the Belgian authorities to find a solution to avoid the destruction of contraceptives.
'The defence of sexual health and reproductive rights is a foreign policy priority for France.'
This week a collective of rights groups, feminists organisations and trade unions in France launched a petition to stop the destruction of the contraceptives. 'We won't allow this unfair and sexist decision to go ahead, it's both an economic and human waste,' they said.
The French Green leader, Marine Tondelier, signed an open letter calling on the French president, Emmanuel Macron, to intervene to stop the contraceptives from being destroyed. 'Our country cannot be complicit, even indirectly, in retrograde policies,' the letter said.
Céline Thiébault-Martinez, a Socialist lawmaker, told France Inter radio on Thursday that if France failed to speak out on the destruction of these contraceptives it would 'lose credibility with women'.
Sarah Durocher, the head of a French family planning group, said: 'France has a moral responsibility to act.'
Charles Dallara, whose politician grandfather Lucien Neuwirth backed the French law authorising oral contraceptives in 1967, wrote an open letter to Macron in which he urged the president not to 'let France become complicit in this scandal'.
The Belgian government said it was in urgent contact with the US but it could not say yet whether the contraceptives had already been moved to France.
A spokesperson for the foreign affairs department said it contacted the US embassy in Brussels as soon as it became aware of the possible destruction of contraception stocks held in the Geel warehouse. 'Foreign Affairs is exploring all possible avenues to prevent the destruction of these stocks, including their temporary relocation,' they added.
'We do not currently have additional details that would confirm whether a transfer of these products to France has taken place.'
The international organisation MSI Reproductive Choices said it had offered to 'purchase, repackage, and manage logistics at our expense, ensuring the products reach those in need', but the offer was rejected.
The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) made a similar offer at 'no cost to the US government' that was also turned down, AFP reported.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
5 minutes ago
- Reuters
Nuclear fuels producer Orano does not expect any impact from EU-US deal
PARIS, Aug 1 (Reuters) - The trade deal between the European Union and the United States should not impact the business of French nuclear fuels company Orano, as so far the U.S. has not imposed tariffs on uranium products, its CEO Nicolas Maes told reporters on Friday. Under the deal announced last Sunday, the EU agreed to purchase nuclear energy products along with U.S. liquefied natural gas and oil worth in total $750 billion over the next three years. "We have looked at the material, and for all the deals that have been signed so far between the U.S. and other regions of the world, and isotopes, uranium, enriched uranium are exempted," Maes said. However, he said the deal's provision for exports of nuclear fuel from the U.S. to Europe was surprising, given that the U.S. is an importer, rather than exporter of the fuel it needs for its nuclear power plants. "The U.S. market is structurally importing nuclear material and not exporting," Maes said. He also said Orano's plans to expand the company's nuclear enrichment facilities in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, should not be affected by either the trade deal or U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order deregulating the nuclear sector. Trump signed an executive order In May to reduce regulations and fast-track new licences for nuclear reactors and power plants and reinvigorate uranium production and enrichment in the country. Maes said that Orano will maintain its nuclear safety standards but the order may result in easier dialogue between the nuclear safety authority and the utilities during the permitting process. He repeated an earlier comment that a final investment decision on the project is expected in 2027.
Spectator
6 minutes ago
- Spectator
Trump hasn't won the trade war
Maybe Trump doesn't always chicken out after all. Rapid trade deals with the UK, Japan, the EU and others in recent weeks may have given the impression that the trade war was essentially over. Today, though, comes Trump's Ardennes offensive, with immediate tariffs of 35 per cent announced for Canada. Other countries have been given a week to prepare for steep increases: India will be subject to 25 per cent tariffs, Taiwan 20 per cent and Switzerland – far from neutral in this particular conflict – 39 per cent. According to Trump, Canada has been singled out for harsh treatment because it has failed to cooperate on the flow of fentanyl across the border. Trump also hinted that he was punishing Canada for recognising Palestine, but then he has just done a trade deal with the EU in spite of France taking the same action, and didn't make any trade threats to Britain in spite of Keir Starmer saying this week that the UK will recognise Palestine in September if Israel does not meet certain conditions. It seems rather more likely that Trump is saying: look, other countries have yielded and agreed to one-sided trade deals with the US – I'm going to carry on beating you about the head until you agree to do the same. But will they? So far, the countries which have agreed to Trump's rather rough and ready trade deals have acted as if the benefits of a trading relationship with the US are one-way – they have more to lose than the US if a deal cannot be struck. But of course that is not always true. Taiwan, for example, produces over 90 per cent of the world's high-end microchips, which are implanted in just about every device manufactured in the US. What benefit does it bring America if those chips are in future taxed at 20 per cent? There is a strange dislocation in attitudes towards Trump's tariffs. Those who insist he has a very clever strategy and is winning tend also to be people who, in any other context, are in favour of low taxes. But a tariff is just a tax like any other – it adds costs to business and so suppresses economic activity. If tariffs are set at modest levels, it may be worth putting up with tariffs' depressing effect in return for the revenue they raise. Raise them above a certain level, however, and revenue will start to decline as business activity is discouraged – the classic Laffer effect. US growth may have proved more resilient than many feared it would be after Liberation Day, but it is certain that tariffs on raw materials and components are a negative influence on US manufacturing industry. A country does not 'win' by taxing its imports more than other countries tax its exports – if it did, the US would be one of the poorest countries in the world while many African countries would be startlingly rich. The US has done brilliantly well out of a regime of low import tariffs – as has Singapore, one of the few countries which, prior to Liberation Day, imposed even lower tariffs than did the US. But even if you do think that imposing higher tariffs than your trading partners amounts to 'victory', it is far from clear that Trump will emerge the eventual winner. Some countries may have yielded to him, but others are clearly holding out, and may well make the calculation that the US has more to lose from a trade war than they do. This war has a long way to run yet.
Telegraph
7 minutes ago
- Telegraph
European stock markets sink as Trump unleashes new global tariffs
European stock markets slumped to a five-week low on Friday after Donald Trump unleashed sweeping global tariffs, including a 39pc levy on Switzerland. The Eurostoxx index dropped 1.7pc as stocks were also dragged lower by the US president's demand that the world's biggest drug makers must lower prices for American consumers. Switzerland faces a double blow. It is home to some of the world's biggest pharmaceuticals companies, and now also faces becoming an isolated island of high tariffs surrounded by European nations whose manufacturers face relatively lower taxes in exporting to the US. The Eurostoxx index dropped 1.6pc to its lowest level since late June, while the FTSE 100 fell 0.6pc. More than £16bn was wiped off the value of Europe's biggest pharmaceutical companies amid fears such a move will be funded by higher charges on the rest of the world. AstraZeneca was one of the biggest fallers on the FTSE 100 on Friday morning, with shares down 3.9pc, while GlaxoSmithKline fell 1.6pc. Novo Nordisk, the Danish maker of Ozempic, is trading down 4.4pc in Copenhagen, and Sanofi is down 0.3pc in Paris. It came as Mr Trump imposed sweeping tariffs on trading partners including a 35pc levy on neighbouring Canada, in a move that will upend global trade. From next Friday, a new range of tariffs will apply to 69 other nations, ranging from 10pc – the same level facing goods from Britain under the UK-US trade deal – to 41pc for products from Syria.
