U.N. Population Fund Cuts

Trump Eliminated Funding For The UN Population Fund

New York Times: Trump “Terminated United States Funding For The United Nations Population Fund, The World’s Leading Provider Of Family Planning Services.” According to The New York Times, “The Trump administration informed Congress on Monday that it had terminated United States funding for the United Nations Population Fund, the world’s leading provider of family planning services, including contraception, to women in at least 155 countries.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

The Administration Pulled $32.5 Million In Funding From The UN Population Fund, But Claimed Funds Would Be “Shifted To Similar Programs” At USAID. According to Business Insider, “The UN Population Fund will lose $32.5 million in funding from the 2017 budget, the State Department said, with funds shifted to similar programs at the US Agency for International Development.” [Business Insider, 4/4/17]

New York Times: The United States Has Been “One Of The Top Donor Nations To The United Nations, And The Denial Of Funding Was One Of President Trump’s Biggest Moves Yet To Reduce Financing For Family Planning.” According to The New York Times, “The United States is one of the top donor nations to the United Nations, and the denial of funding was one of President Trump’s biggest moves yet to reduce financing for family planning. While the administration had signaled back in January that was adopting a tougher stance toward family planning services that provide abortion counseling, the move was nonetheless a stunning piece of news to advocates for women’s and children’s health, particularly in the developing world.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

Trump’s Cuts To The UN Population Fund Were An Extension Of His “Global Gag Rule” And Budgetary Aims

Guardian: Trump’s Cuts To UNFPA Came After His Reinstatement Of The “Global Gag Rule” In January Which “Withholds US Funding For Overseas Organisations Engaged In Any Programmes That Could Relate To Abortion.” According to The Guardian, “Last month the Guardian learned that 27 short-term UNFPA projects supported by the US in some of the world’s most precarious settings were under threat. Those helping people fleeing violence in places such as Syria, Yemen and Iraq, face being axed later this year. Trump reinstated the Mexico City policy – also known as the the [sic] ‘global gag rule’ – in January. The global gag withholds US funding for overseas organisations engaged in any programmes that could relate to abortion. Trump broadened the scope of the global gag to include all worldwide health assistance in his 23 January executive order, which withholds at least half a billion dollars in US funds. A lack of clarity around the rule, however, has left aid groups in an uneasy limbo and both Republican and Democratic lawmakers seeking clarity.” [Guardian, 4/4/17]

Trump’s Cuts To UNFPA Follow His Proposed 28% Budget Cuts For Diplomacy And Foreign Aid And Unspecified Reduction In UN Support. According to Aljazeera, “The cut follows Trump’s proposed 28 percent budget reduction for diplomacy and foreign aid, including an unspecified reduction in financial support for the United Nations and its agencies, announced last month.” [Aljazeera, 4/3/17]

Trump Premised Cuts To UNFPA Funds On The Kemp-Kasten Amendment Barring Assistance To Organizations Involved In “Coerced Abortion Or Involuntary Sterilization”

Trump’s State Department Claimed In A Letter To The Senate Foreign Relations Committee That The Fund “Supports Or Participates In The Management Of A Program Of Coercive Abortion Or Involuntary Sterilization.” According to The New York Times, “In a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the State Department’s Bureau of Legislative Affairs said it had determined that the Population Fund ‘supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization,’ a reference to the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, a 1980s-era law enacted in response to evidence of forced abortions and involuntary sterilization in China.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

NYT: The Claim Was “A Reference To The Kemp-Kasten Amendment, A 1980s-Era Law Enacted In Response To Evidence Of Forced Abortions And Involuntary Sterilization In China.” According to The New York Times, “In a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the State Department’s Bureau of Legislative Affairs said it had determined that the Population Fund ‘supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization,’ a reference to the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, a 1980s-era law enacted in response to evidence of forced abortions and involuntary sterilization in China.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

• The Language Of The Kemp-Kasten Amendment Bars U.S. Funding To “Any Organization Or Program Which, As Determined By The President Of The United States, Supports Or Participates In The Management Of A Program Of Coercive Abortion Or Involuntary Sterilization.” According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, “Kemp-Kasten, first enacted by Congress in 1985 and included in appropriations language annually, states that no U.S. funds may be made available to ‘any organization or program which, as determined by the president of the United States, supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.’” [Kaiser Family Foundation, 4/17/17]
• Since Its Enactment, Republican Administrations Have Considered UNFPA Funding In Violation Of The Amendment And Democrats Have Considered It Not In Violation. According to BuzzFeed, “Like the gag rule, the interpretation of the Kemp-Kasten Amendment generally changes by administration. Every Democratic administration since the amendment passed in 1985 has determined that UNFPA funding does not violate the amendment; every Republican administration has determined, by invoking China’s policies, that it does.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

There Was No Evidence To Support The Trump Administration’s Kemp-Kasten Claims

The U.S. State Department, The British All-Party Parliamentary Group On Population, Development, And Reproductive Health, And The Interfaith Delegation Have All Found No Evidence Of Coerced Abortion Or Involuntary Sterilizations Supported By UNFPA. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, “To date, there has not been evidence that UNFPA supports coercive abortion or involuntary sterilizations. Several evaluations by the U.S. government (including one by an assessment team sent to China by the State Department in 2002) as well as other groups, such as the British All-Party Parliamentary Group on Population, Development, and Reproductive Health (in 2002) and the Interfaith Delegation (in 2003), have found no evidence of direct engagement by UNFPA in such activities in China or elsewhere.” [Kaiser Family Foundation, 4/17/17]

Business Insider: The UN Population Fund “Argued It Was ‘Erroneous’ To Suggest It Was Complicit In China’s Policies.”  According to Business Insider, “The UN Population Fund, known as UNFPA, said it regretted the US move and argued it was ‘erroneous’ to suggest it was complicit in China’s policies. ‘UNFPA refutes this claim, as all of its work promotes the human rights of individuals and couples to make their own decisions, free of coercion or discrimination,’ the agency said in a statement.” [Business Insider, 4/4/17]

United Nations Foundation Vice President For Public Policy And Advocacy Peter Yeo: “UNFPA Provides No Financial Support To The Government Of China For Any Program Whatsoever […] So I Don’t Think This Is A Fact-Based Determination Process.”  According to BuzzFeed, “‘The irony is that UNFPA provides no financial support to the government of China for any program whatsoever,’ said Peter Yeo, vice president for public policy and advocacy at the United Nations Foundation, a nonprofit that supports the UN’s work. ‘So I don’t think this is a fact-based determination process. I think they know what they wanted to [do] and they’ll throw some language against the wall and call it a ‘reasonable determination.’ The State Department’s determination appears to concede this point but insists the agency nevertheless violates the amendment.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

U.S. UNFPA Funds Did Not Fund Abortions Of Any Kind

International Campaign For Women’s Right To Safe Abortion International Coordinator Marge Berer: “The UNFPA Do Not Fund Safe Abortions, Let Alone Forced Abortions. The Accusation Is Ridiculous And Reveals Trump’s Ignorance Of The Issues.” According to The Guardian, “Marge Berer, international coordinator of the International Campaign for Women’s Right to Safe Abortion said the decision echoes what took place under previous US Republican presidents each time the global gag rule was reinstituted: ‘The UNFPA do not fund safe abortions, let alone forced abortions. The accusation is ridiculous and reveals Trump’s ignorance of the issues, and copycat behaviour, above all.’” [Guardian, 4/4/17]

Kaiser Family Foundation: U.S. Family Planning And Reproductive Health Spending Has Banned “The Direct Use Of U.S. Funding Overseas For Abortion As A Method Of Family Planning” Since 1973. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, “U.S. funding for [family planning and reproductive health] FP/RH is governed by several legislative and policy restrictions, including a legal ban on the direct use of U.S. funding overseas for abortion as a method of family planning (which has been in place since 1973) as well as more stringent restrictions in some years.” [Kaiser Family Foundation, 2/9/17]

UNFPA Has Served As The World’s Single Largest Reproductive Health Care Provider

New York Times: UNFPA Has Been “The Single Largest International Provider Of Contraception, Family Planning, And Other Reproductive Health Services.” According to The New York Times, “The Population Fund is the single largest international provider of contraception, family planning, and other reproductive health services. In 2016, health advocacy groups say, American support for the organization’s work prevented an estimated 320,000 pregnancies and averted 100,000 unsafe abortions, while ensuring 800,000 people had access to contraception.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

UN Foundation President And CEO Kathy Calvin: UNFPA Has Been “On The Front Lines In More Than 150 Countries, Often In Places Where The U.S. Can’t Be, Providing Critical Services, Such As Voluntary Family Planning, Midwife Training, Pre-Natal Care And Safe Delivery Services, And Working To End Child Marriage And Female Genital Mutilation.” According to Vox, “United Nations Foundation president and CEO Kathy Calvin called the defunding ‘unacceptable and in stark contrast to American values’ in a statement: UNFPA is on the front lines in more than 150 countries, often in places where the U.S. can’t be, providing critical services, such as voluntary family planning, midwife training, pre-natal care and safe delivery services, and working to end child marriage and female genital mutilation. UNFPA does not fund or perform abortions or forced sterilizations anywhere in the world. Instead, the agency offers voluntary family planning to prevent unintended pregnancies which, in turn, empowers girls and women to pursue an education, earn an income, and live more prosperous lives.” [Vox, 4/4/17]

UNFPA Has Saved The Lives Of Tens Of Thousands Of Women. According to the BBC, “The UNFPA calls those claims ‘erroneous’ and says that ‘all of its work promotes the rights of individuals and couples to make their own decisions, free of coercion or discrimination’. It says its programmes have saved the lives of tens of thousands of women. Its works include: Helping women and young people to access sexual and reproductive services, including family planning[;] Preventing unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions[;] Supporting maternal health[;] Programmes in the world’s ‘most fragile’ countries, including Iraq, South Sudan, Syria, Yemen and Somalia.” [BBC, 4/4/17]

U.S. Support For UNFPA HAs Provided Reproductive Health Care To Millions Annually

In 2015, The U.S. Was UNFPA’s 4^th Largest Donor, Contributing $75 Million. According to The New York Times, “The organization is financed with voluntary contributions. According to its 2015 annual report, the latest available, the United States was the fourth-largest donor with contributions exceeding $75 million.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

New York Times: In 2016, American Support For UNFPA “Prevented An Estimated 320,000 Pregnancies And Averted 100,000 Unsafe Abortions, While Ensuring 800,000 People Had Access To Contraception.” According to The New York Times, “The Population Fund is the single largest international provider of contraception, family planning, and other reproductive health services. In 2016, health advocacy groups say, American support for the organization’s work prevented an estimated 320,000 pregnancies and averted 100,000 unsafe abortions, while ensuring 800,000 people had access to contraception.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

• In 2016, U.S. Funding For UNFPA Helped Ensure 1,251 Fistula Surgeries. According to a UNFPA press release, “UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, works in more than 150 countries and territories, home to more than 80 per cent of the world’s population. With support from the United States, UNFPA in 2016 was able to: Save the lives of 2,340 women from dying during pregnancy and childbirth; Prevent 947,000 unintended pregnancies; Ensure 1,251 fistula surgeries; Prevent 295,000 unsafe abortions; Help 3 million couples prevent unwanted pregnancy.” [UNFPA, 4/4/17]
• In 2016, U.S. Funding For UNFPA Helped Prevent 295,000 Unsafe Abortions And Helped 3 Million Couples Prevent Unwanted Pregnancy. According to a UNFPA press release, “UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, works in more than 150 countries and territories, home to more than 80 per cent of the world’s population. With support from the United States, UNFPA in 2016 was able to: Save the lives of 2,340 women from dying during pregnancy and childbirth; Prevent 947,000 unintended pregnancies; Ensure 1,251 fistula surgeries; Prevent 295,000 unsafe abortions; Help 3 million couples prevent unwanted pregnancy.” [UNFPA, 4/4/17]

U.S. Funding To UNFPA Has Helped Some Of The World’s Most Vulnerable For Whom Cuts Would Be Catastrophic

Vox: “U.S. Funding For UNFPA Had Worked To Ensure Safe Childbirth For Refugees In The Zaatari Refugee Camp In Jordan And Funded The Only Iraqi Clinic For Survivors Of ‘Physical Abuse, Sexual Violence, And Other Horrific Atrocities Inflicted By ISIL.’”  According to Vox, “The statement went on to note, for example, that US funding for UNFPA had worked to ensure safe childbirth for refugees in the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan and funded the only Iraqi clinic for survivors of ‘physical abuse, sexual violence, and other horrific atrocities inflicted by ISIL.’” [Vox, 4/4/17]

UNFPA: U.S. Funding For UNFPA Has “Combatt[ed] Gender-Based Violence And Reduc[ed] The Scourge Of Maternal Deaths In The World’s Most Fragile Settings, In Areas Of Conflict And Natural Disasters, Including Iraq, Nepal, Sudan, Syria, The Philippines, Ukraine And Yemen.” According to a UNFPA press release, “The United States, one of our founding members, has long partnered with UNFPA to protect and promote the reproductive health and rights of women and girls, thereby fostering healthier women and girls and their families. The support we received over the years from the Government and people of the United States has saved tens of thousands of mothers from preventable deaths and disabilities, and especially now in the rapidly developing global humanitarian crises. With previous United States contributions, UNFPA was combatting gender-based violence and reducing the scourge of maternal deaths in the world’s most fragile settings, in areas of conflict and natural disasters, including Iraq, Nepal, Sudan, Syria, the Philippines, Ukraine and Yemen.” [UNFPA, 4/4/17]

BuzzFeed: U.S. Funding For UNFPA Has Supported “A Host Of Programs, From ‘Dignity Kits’ Distributed To Women After The Earthquake In Nepal To ‘Birthing Kits’ Given To Women In Emergency Situations.”  According to BuzzFeed, “The funding cut has long been expected, but public health experts say it will be a heavy blow. US funding underpins a host of programs, from ‘dignity kits’ distributed to women after the earthquake in Nepal to ‘birthing kits’ given to women in emergency situations. ‘It’s just the basics — a clean tarp, and a way to cut the umbilical cord — but they won’t get those any more because of these cuts,’ said [vice president for public policy and advocacy at the United Nations Foundation Peter ]Yeo.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

United Nations Association UK Lord Wood Of Anfield: “America’s Decision To Withhold Millions Of Dollars In Funding From The Population Fund Could Be Catastrophic.” According to The Guardian, “Lord Wood of Anfield, chairman of the United Nations Association UK, said: ‘America’s decision to withhold millions of dollars in funding from the population fund could be catastrophic unless others step into the gap. Not only would this money have reportedly prevented 2m unwanted pregnancies and the deaths of 77,000 children, but it represents America’s investment in global stability. Putting ‘America first’ means sticking to this investment, not backing out from an international system that has kept it safe for over 70 years.’” [Guardian, 4/4/17]

Reuters: UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres “Warned That A U.S. Cut In Funding For The U.N. Population Fund Could Have ‘Devastating Effects’ On Vulnerable Women And Girls Around The World.” According to Reuters, “United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that a U.S. cut in funding for the U.N. Population Fund could have ‘devastating effects’ on vulnerable women and girls around the world, a spokesman said. ‘The Secretary-General deeply regrets the decision by the United States to cut financial support for the U.N. Population Fund, which could have devastating effects on the health of vulnerable women and girls and their families around the world,’ spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters.” [Reuters, 4/4/17]

International Women’s Health Coalition: The Trump Administration’s Decision Was “A Major Blow To The World’s Most Important Agency For Reproductive Health.” According to The New York Times, “The International Women’s Health Coalition, a New York-based group, said in a statement that the Trump administration’s decision was ‘a major blow to the world’s most important agency for reproductive health.” [New York Times, 4/3/17]

Reproductive Health Matters Editor Shirin Heidari: Trump’s Cuts To UNFPA “Would Hit The Poorest And Have A “Devastating Impact’ On Women’s Sexual And Reproductive Health And Rights Worldwide.” According to The Guardian, “According to The Guardian, “Shirin Heidari, editor of the journal Reproductive Health Matters, said the administration’s stand would hit the poorest and have a ‘devastating impact’ on women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights worldwide. ‘The UNFPA is one of the largest providers of contraceptives worldwide. This decision will not only lead to a reduction of abortions, which I assume is what the US administration is aiming at, it will with high probability lead to an increased risk of abortion as women’s access to family planning and reproductive services in general will be undermined,’ she said. ‘We know that unsafe abortion remains one of the leading causes of maternal death, so it will have a huge impact on women’s life and health worldwide, particularly in the poorer areas of the world.’” [Guardian, 4/4/17]

U.S. Funding To UNFPA Has Saved Tens Of Thousands Of Lives

UNFPA: U.S. Funding For UNFPA “Has Saved Tens Of Thousands Of Mothers From Preventable Deaths And Disabilities.” According to a UNFPA press release, “The United States, one of our founding members, has long partnered with UNFPA to protect and promote the reproductive health and rights of women and girls, thereby fostering healthier women and girls and their families. The support we received over the years from the Government and people of the United States has saved tens of thousands of mothers from preventable deaths and disabilities, and especially now in the rapidly developing global humanitarian crises.” [UNFPA, 4/4/17]

UNFPA: In 2016, U.S. Funding For UNFPA Saved “The Lives Of 2,340 Women From Dying During Pregnancy And Childbirth.” According to a UNFPA press release, “UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, works in more than 150 countries and territories, home to more than 80 per cent of the world’s population. With support from the United States, UNFPA in 2016 was able to: Save the lives of 2,340 women from dying during pregnancy and childbirth; Prevent 947,000 unintended pregnancies; Ensure 1,251 fistula surgeries; Prevent 295,000 unsafe abortions; Help 3 million couples prevent unwanted pregnancy.” [UNFPA, 4/4/17]

Cuts To UNFPA Would Hurt Refugees

The U.S. Has Been The Largest Donor To UNFPA’s Front-Line Work In The Mediterranean. According to Foreign Policy, “The United States is the second largest donor to UNFPA overall, and its largest donor for front-line work in the Mediterranean, which includes the only clinic in Iraq for women who have survived sexual violence under the rule of the Islamic State.” [Foreign Policy, 4/4/17]

BuzzFeed: Most U.S. Funding For UNFPA In 2016 Was Used For Crisis Situations Including Providing “Maternal Care In Zataari, The World’s Largest Refugee Camp, Where More Than 7000 Babies Have Been Born — Without A Single Maternal Death.” According to BuzzFeed, “The majority of the $75 million in funding the US government gave UNFPA in 2016 was for use in crisis situations. US funding has been crucial to maternal care in Zataari, the world’s largest camp, where more than 7000 babies have been born — without a single maternal death, the agency said.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

Friends Of UNFPA Executive Director Melissa Kuklin: “Loss Of US Funding Will Make Response To The Syrian Refugee Crisis Especially Difficult.” According to BuzzFeed, “Loss of US funding will make response to the Syrian refugee crisis especially difficult, [executive director of Friends of UNFPA Melissa] Kuklin added. Nearly 75,000 people will lose access to gender-based violence outreach and psychological support, and nearly 50,000 will lose safe delivery services, in Jordan’s refugee camps.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

• Kuklin: With Trump’s Cuts To UNFPA, “Nearly 75,000 People Will Lose Access To Gender-Based Violence Outreach And Psychological Support, And Nearly 50,000 Will Lose Safe Delivery Services, In Jordan’s Refugee Camps.” According to BuzzFeed, “Loss of US funding will make response to the Syrian refugee crisis especially difficult, [executive director of Friends of UNFPA Melissa] Kuklin added. Nearly 75,000 people will lose access to gender-based violence outreach and psychological support, and nearly 50,000 will lose safe delivery services, in Jordan’s refugee camps.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

Guardian: “27 Short-Term UNFPA Projects Supported By The US In Some Of The World’s Most Precarious Settings Were Under Threat.” According to The Guardian, “Last month the Guardian learned that 27 short-term UNFPA projects supported by the US in some of the world’s most precarious settings were under threat. Those helping people fleeing violence in places such as Syria, Yemen and Iraq, face being axed later this year. Trump reinstated the Mexico City policy – also known as the the [sic] ‘global gag rule’ – in January.” [Guardian, 4/4/17]

• Guardian: Trump’s Cuts To UNFPA Jeopardize “Projects Helping People Fleeing Violence In Places Such As Syria, Yemen And Iraq.” According to The Guardian, “Last month the Guardian learned that 27 short-term UNFPA projects supported by the US in some of the world’s most precarious settings were under threat. Those helping people fleeing violence in places such as Syria, Yemen and Iraq, face being axed later this year. Trump reinstated the Mexico City policy – also known as the the [sic] ‘global gag rule’ – in January.” [Guardian, 4/4/17]

Cuts To UNFPA Would Stall Progress In Addressing Gender-Based Violence

BuzzFeed: Trump’s Funding Cut Will “Deal A Blow To Gender-Based Violence Prevention And Response Services In Crisis Settings” As The U.S. Was The Second Largest Donor To UNFPA’s Gender-Based Violence Work. According to BuzzFeed, “The funding cut will also deal a blow to gender-based violence prevention and response services in crisis settings around the world. UNFPA is the ‘lead agency’ among all international organizations in responding to gender violence, and the US was the second-largest donor, at $38.3 million, to the UNFPA’s gender-based violence work last year, according to the UN agency.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

Kuklin: With Trump’s Cuts To UNFPA, “Nearly 75,000 People Will Lose Access To Gender-Based Violence Outreach And Psychological Support, And Nearly 50,000 Will Lose Safe Delivery Services, In Jordan’s Refugee Camps.”  According to BuzzFeed, “Loss of US funding will make response to the Syrian refugee crisis especially difficult, [executive director of Friends of UNFPA Melissa] Kuklin added. Nearly 75,000 people will lose access to gender-based violence outreach and psychological support, and nearly 50,000 will lose safe delivery services, in Jordan’s refugee camps.” [BuzzFeed, 3/3/17]

Cuts To UNFPA Would Contribute To A Massive Funding Gap

Guardian: “UNFPA Faces A Funding Gap Of More Than $700 Million Until 2020.” According to The Guardian, “The UNFPA is facing a funding gap of more than $700m until 2020. Last year, it reported a $140m shortfall as major donors, including Denmark and Finland, cut budgets.” [Guardian, 4/4/17]

Cutting UNFPA Funding In The Past Proved Disastrous

When George W. Bush Defunded UNFPA It Was Estimated His Actions Resulted In 2 Million Unintended Pregnancies And The Deaths Of 77,000 Children. According to Vox, “It’s not the first time the US has defunded the UNFPA. The George W. Bush administration similarly cited Kemp-Kasten to strip funding in 2002, claiming UNFPA was complicit in forced sterilizations and abortions as part of China’s one-child policy. A Guardian op-ed at the time estimated the lost funding would have prevented 2 million unintended pregnancies and the deaths of 77,000 children.” [Vox, 4/4/17]

NARAL Estimated That Bush’s Withdrawal Of UNFPA Funds Would Have Resulted, “Ironically, In An Estimated 1m Abortions As A Result Of 3m Unplanned Pregnancies.” According to The Guardian, “Immediately after the US government announced it had pulled a $34m plug on worldwide family planning services, the executive director of the United Nations population fund (UNFPA) gave this stark assessment: ‘Women and children will die because of this decision.’ The lost funding, which accounts for 13% of UNFPA’s global budget, would have prevented 2m unwanted pregnancies and the deaths of 77,000 children, the agency said. The US president, George Bush, mouthed concern that US funds may be used to perform forced abortions on women in China, despite his own fact-finding mission assuring him that was not the case. […] A US pro-choice group, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, estimated that the withdrawal of UNFPA funds would result, ironically, in an estimated 1m abortions as a result of 3m unplanned pregnancies.” [Guardian, 7/23/02]