Sunday, May 11, 2008
Its far-reaching declaration could funnel billions toward reducing the spread of the disease by 25 percent.
Jun 28, 2001 | The United Nations wrapped up its first-ever meeting focused on the global AIDS crisis in New York this week with a sweeping 16-page "Declaration of Commitment" on HIV/AIDS endorsed by all 189 member nations. Surely no one will leave completely happy with the result: an international treaty with bold propositions that is, ultimately, unenforceable.
But there were also enough firsts for AIDS activists, women's rights activists and gay and lesbian human rights groups that nearly everyone could walk away with some sense of a victory.
"I must say that, for once, controversial issues were not covered in a blanket of diplomatic language," said Pieter Piot, executive director of the United Nations AIDS program (UNAIDS). "The issues were discussed explicitly." Or, as Gudmund Hernes, director and coordinator of AIDS activities for the U.N. agency UNESCO, put it: "If anyone told me 30 years ago that the General Assembly would talk about condoms, I would have said that it was impossible."
The drafting of the declaration proved to be the most contentious challenge of the summit, and ended with major modifications of the text that proved unpopular with some countries, which had wanted language that was decisively pro-gay rights and franker in its description of intravenous-drug use and prostitution. Still, argued U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the declaration ultimately proved "progressive." For example, it calls for nondiscriminatory access to "condoms, microbicides, lubricants, sterile injecting equipment, drugs including anti-retroviral therapy" and more. Sterile injecting equipment, of course, could be read as an allusion to clean needles for intravenous-drug users.
Much ado had been made at the opening of the meeting about a fight between conservative religious blocs led by Islamic nations and the Vatican and socially liberal countries led by the European Union and Canada over whether the declaration should explicitly make reference to homosexuals, intravenous-drug users and sex workers -- language that reportedly was included in a draft version of the document created by UNAIDS. That battle, along with disagreement over human rights guidelines for dealing with the HIV/AIDS crisis, led to a rift that prolonged negotiations until 3 a.m., and held up approval of the declaration until the final day of the meeting.
The United States, according to foreign press accounts, joined the Vatican and the Islamic nations in arguing against inclusion of the language. The exclusion of such language would be consistent with previous positions taken by President Bush, from a comment made during the presidential debates that he doesn't believe in "special rights" for gays to a statement last month in which he said that he would not acknowledge June as Gay Pride Month because, as a spokesman said, Bush does not believe in "politicizing people's sexual orientation." Generally speaking, Bush seems to eschew any legal or official recognition of gays and lesbians.
When asked whether the United States played a role in modifying the declaration, John Sandage, a State Department lawyer who was a chief U.S. negotiator, told Salon: "We were comfortable with references to gay men in the document. We had difficulties with the way it was worded, and we wanted to find a text that could get the support of everybody because we thought it was important that the world speak with one voice. So we had flexibility on the choice of words. But we didn't have any difficulty acknowledging that gay men are a vulnerable group."
Sandage declined to specify what language created obstacles, but when asked whether it was the term "men to men sex" (a term others report caused major controversy in the draft negotiations) the U.S. had objected to, Sandage said: "It wasn't that we were uncomfortable with it, it was that other member countries were uncomfortable with it and we wanted to be sure we could find a text that everybody would support." The compromise language alludes to gays, drug users and sex workers ("sexual practices, drug using behavior, livelihood") in a section calling for programs that address the groups most vulnerable to HIV infection.
Get Salon in your mailbox!