Listen without prejudice
The UN is devoting three entire days (31 May-2 June) to a discussion on HIV
and Aids at a UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) in New York. During
this meeting, the general secretary will report on progress by member countries
on achieving universal access to HIV treatments by 2010.
As millions are still dying, getting infected, being orphaned and failing
to get life-saving drugs, a progress check is timely. People Living with HIV
(PLWH) from all over the world desperately want to attend UNGASS to tell the
world what is really happening in their particular Aids-hit countries. For
the first time, a person with HIV will be allowed to address the assembly,
a privilege usually only reserved for member states and UN officials. And
there will be round table discussions and forums and a special hearing for
PLWH to speak out.
But all this worthy involvement hides the fact that every non-US citizen living
with HIV has to undergo the humiliation of telling US immigration about their
HIV positive status, just to attend.
Aids activists are also angry that UNAIDS handpicked the activists involved
with the pre-UNGASS consultations that will ultimately inform the hearings.
Every PLWH attending will each represent some 650,000 others that can’t;
that’s a whole lot of responsibility and a whole lot of unheard voices
by any standards.
US activist Gregg Gonsalves, of Gay Men’s Health Crisis, New York, recently
posted a passionate letter to other activists about why he feels this event
is a diversion and distraction from the real fight. He wrote: “Governments
will come to boldly lie about their records in fighting Aids and make hundreds
of new, empty promises.”
Many PLWH are spending much time and money on this event to secure their ‘15
minutes’ with power (much of that time will be spent begging US embassies
to give them a visa, like UKC’s own chair, Bernard Forbes). But is it
worth it?
Gonsalves reckons not. He says PLWH should challenge governments at home rather
than in a forum dominated by world powers. “Will anyone listen to us?”
he asks. “Has anyone asked why the hell we’re devoting millions
of dollars and hours to this process, when the previous UNGASS in 2001 resulted
in a Declaration of Commitment, which was honored neither in word nor deed?
What work hasn’t been done or could have been done with this time, this
money?” It’s a valid point: with the cost of a return ticket from
Mumbai to New York, Médecins Sans Frontières could supply an
HIV positive person with Combivir for four years.
Bernard Forbes has considerable sympathy but still thinks PLWH should attend:
“We run the risk of participating and being ignored but we also run
the risk of participating and being listened too, gaining credibility as people
with the solutions to some of this mess rather than just being seen as the
mess itself.”
Yes, people with HIV should be involved at UNGASS because they may be heard.
But their involvement should not be at the expense of blunting the real fight
on the ground.
What we can be sure of is that UNGASS will generate more thick reports; more
declarations; more promises; more words. And frankly (and this will sound
strange from the editor of an Aids magazine) words are the last thing most
Aids-stricken nations need right now.
Amanda Elliot, managing editor
• For more on the declaration, visit www.ungasshiv.org
