Weapons of mass salvation
In this invited article, Jeffrey Sachs argues that, in the war against want, no less than in the war against terror, actions speak louder than words
IF GEORGE BUSH spent more time and money on mobilising Weapons of Mass Salvation (WMS) in addition to combating Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), we might actually get somewhere in making this planet a safer and more hospitable home. WMD can kill millions and their spread to dangerous hands needs to be opposed resolutely. WMS, in contrast, are the arsenal of life-saving vaccines, medicines and health interventions, emergency food aid and farming technologies that could avert literally millions of deaths each year in the wars against epidemic disease, drought and famine. Yet while the Bush administration is prepared to spend $100 billion to rid Iraq of WMD, it has been unwilling to spend more than 0.2% of that sum ($200m) this year on the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
This article appeared in the By Invitation section of the print edition under the headline “Weapons of mass salvation”
By Invitation October 26th 2002
Discover more
Three presidents on the partnerships that can at last transform Africa
Success teeters on bold, stable funding, say Julius Maada Bio, Lazarus Chakwera and Andry Rajoelina
Assisted-dying advocates’ claims of freedom have it backward, says Danny Kruger
One of a pair of essays in which members of Parliament argue their cases
My assisted-dying bill safely solves a grave injustice, says Kim Leadbeater
One of a pair of essays in which members of Parliament argue their cases
“Middle powers” can thrive in the age of AI, says Eric Schmidt
Google’s former chief executive has a playbook for riding out the revolution
Polls get elections wrong. So use Google, says Seth Stephens-Davidowitz
The data scientist argues that stronger predictions lie in what people search for
War in Ukraine may only intensify under Trump, says Dmytro Kuleba
The country’s former foreign minister explains the powderkeg that is three leaders in a cannot-lose standoff