AS delegates gathered in the Thai capital Bangkok for the 15th international HIV/AIDS conference which began yesterday, there was widespread criticism of the smaller than usual size of the US delegation. Some participants were quick to condemn the Bush administration for not taking the scourge seriously enough and failing to assume the lead in the fight to stop its spread.
Such claims are wrong. No other country is committing more money to the battle against HIV/AIDS than the US. The American taxpayer is spending $15 billion over five years to help combat the condition. This dwarfs the commitment from any other government. It is therefore extremely worrying to see that some influential HIV/AIDS activists have seized the opportunity of the Bangkok summit to play politics and aim a totally unmerited kick at the United States. Far more deserving of censure are those states smitten with HIV/AIDS who are failing to take active measures to stop the spread. Outstanding among these is South Africa, whose President Thabo Mbeki seems still to cling to his original notion that HIV/AIDS is not really a problem. In this purblind behavior, South Africa’s leadership is making a terrible error which deserves the strongest condemnation.
It seems that the real reason that Washington has been singled out for such strident criticism is the conservative emphasis that the US administration has chosen to confront the challenge. President Bush and his advisers believe that the ABC approach, “Abstinence”, “Be Faithful” and “Condoms” is key to the defeat of HIV/AIDS. It is not difficult to see why such a strategy finds little favor among the worldwide HIV/AIDS industry.
The issues of abstinence and fidelity offer no scope for the HIV/AIDS industry beyond the educational campaigns which it would seem, after several years of having money poured into them, have still to bite. Condoms are more useful to the industry which must provide the logistics to procure, package and distribute them in their millions. But what it seems the HIV/AIDS professionals really want to focus their resources on are drugs to slow the onset of the disease once contracted. While clearly anything to relieve the consequences of the condition is welcome, the American strategy actually attacks the disaster at its very roots. It is clear that despite the contribution of rape to the problem, HIV/AIDS is being spread largely by voluntary sexual incontinence. By now most people anywhere in the world should have got the message about the dangers of HIV/AIDS. If it is still being passed on, it is being done by people who have decided to ignore the risk.
There is a very large degree of individual responsibility involved in this health crisis. But that does not suit the HIV/AIDS industry professionals, who would rather duck the politically difficult moral issue and blame easier targets like the United States, despite its mammoth contribution to the struggle. It is because they do not like the Bush White House message that the HIV/AIDS industry is trying to shoot the messenger.
