The AIDS movement is at a “crossroads”, according to two
panels of activists and policymakers speaking this week at the Eighteenth
International AIDS Conference in Vienna, Austria.
A satellite session hosted by the Treatment Action Campaign
(TAC) and a session entitled Durban +10: A New Call to Activism highlighted
the complexities advocates face as the epidemic enters its fourth decade.
Sustained political will, insufficient funding, government restriction of civil
society, and accountability are all of central concern to those working in the
field today.
Both sessions focused on the history of TAC,
particularly its battles with the South African government under the presidency
of Thabo Mbeki, and its gains in introducing ARVs to the country. TAC featured
prominently during the 2000 Durban AIDS conference, which TAC General Secretary
Vuyiseka Dubula called “a turning point” in the national and international AIDS
movement. Most notable was the rollout of ARVs to resource-limited settings in the
years following the conference, made possible by increased political will,
decreased drug prices, stronger scientific research, and more comprehensive
national and international policies.
What we’re hearing is … vicious. It is AIDS has enough, it’s not
sustainable … let’s do more with less … I think this is very dangerous. Michel Kazatchkine, Executive Director of the Global Fund
But activists are worried that the next decade may not be as
energetic as the one prior, which was spurred on by Durban successes. “I’m
questioning how we can sustain the energy that we made at Durban another ten years,”
said Mark Heywood, Executive Director of South Africa’s Section 27 (formerly
the AIDS Law Project). “We have more tools than we had before, we have more
knowledge than we had before. But tools and knowledge are not self-implemented.
There has to be an energy… What we need most is our ability to sustain … effective
civil society.”
According to Paula Akugizibwe of the AIDS and Rights
Alliance for Southern Africa (ARASA), the movement may in fact be
entering its most trying period yet. “The situation today is a lot more
complex,” she said. “We’re still facing financially driven political hostility,
but [now] it’s being presented under pseudo-scientific arguments.”
“I think there’s a
danger in fighting for political decisions to be made […] and then thinking that
we’ve wont the battle,” Akugizibwe continued. “But that’s actually when [it]
really begins. And that’s often the most difficult battle because [it] is not
so clearly defined.”
According to Heywood, political gains can both harm and help
the AIDS movement. Heywood questions the effectiveness of what he calls “the
co-option of activists into the national response … Sometimes it is very
difficult to tread the line between constructive partnership … and … forced
silences that become a condition of ongoing partnerships.” Heywood noted that
he speaks from personal experience, acting as chairperson of the South African
National AIDS Council, which comprises representatives from government,
civil society and the business sector.
Akugizibwe contends that supporting activists working
locally is key to the continued success of the movement. Noting that many ARASA
partners face intimidation by both government offices and UN agencies when
speaking out about health systems’ failings, Akugizibwe said: “These are the
realities in which activism is taking place in many countries in the African
region … we have seen a strong pushback from governments.” While other activists
can offer guidance and solidarity to those living under repressive conditions,
Akugizibwe stressed the variety of situations in which advocates live and work.
“[Support] cannot be didactic [or] based on the assumption that everybody’s
coming from where we’re coming from,” she said. “There are very real,
life-threatening realities that activists face.”
The AIDS response is further stymied by corruption and lack
of accountability. According to Akugizibwe, “Accountability is what’s really
missing in the response.” Heywood remarked that this not only needed to be
practiced by governments and funders, but by NGOs as well. “We talk about
government accountability, we talk about donor accountability, but often we
evade our own responsibility.”
In line with the main conference theme of funding, panelists
spoke critically of the so-called 'AIDS backlash'. “We’re facing a lot of
hostility,” said Michel Kazatchkine, Executive Director of the Global Fund.
“What we’re hearing is … vicious. It is AIDS has enough, it’s not
sustainable … let’s do more with less … I think this is very dangerous.”
All panelists noted the necessity of African governments to
live up to their commitment to spend 15% of their total budget on health, as
outlined in the 2001 Abuja Declaration. Echoing Akugizibwe’s comment that
failure to do so is “embarrassing”, Lesotho Minister of Health and Social Welfare
Mphu Ramatlapeng said, “Remember, 15% is the bare minimum.”
Activists from both sessions agreed that increased
focus on Global Fund replenishment was the key issue facing the movement in the
next several months. Heywood asked, “What are we going to do between now and
October to make sure that the Global Fund is replenished, and what are we going
to do after October? We have to have a strategy for that, otherwise we cannot
go any further.”