Brazil spurns US terms for Aids help

Sarah Boseley and Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Wednesday May 4, 2005

The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5185219-111023,00.html

Brazil yesterday became the first country to
take a public stand against the Bush administration's
massive Aids programme which is seen by many as seeking
increasingly to press its anti-abortion, pro-abstinence
sexual agenda on poorer countries.

Campaigners applauded Brazil's rejection of $40m for
its Aids programmes because it refuses to agree to a
declaration condemning prostitution.

The government and many Aids organisations believe such
a declaration would be a serious barrier to helping sex
workers protect themselves and their clients from
infection.

The demand from the US administration, heavily
influenced by the religious right, follows what is
known as the "global gag" - a ban on US government
funds to any foreign-based organisation which has links
to abortion. This has resulted in the removal of
millions of dollars of funding from family planning
clinics worldwide.

Yesterday Pedro Chequer, the director of Brazil's
HIV/Aids programme, said the government had managed to
resist US pressure during negotiations on the Aids
funding to focus on promoting abstinence and fidelity
rather than condoms - another ideological battle being
waged by the religious right. But the US negotiators
insisted that the clause on prostitution had to stay.

"I would like to confirm that Brazil has taken this
decision in order to preserve its autonomy on issues
related to national policies on HIV/Aids as well as
ethical and human rights principles," he told the
Guardian.

Campaigners congratulated the Brazilian government for
its stance, and voiced concerns that the declaration on
prostitution could damage efforts to tackle Aids among
sex workers in many countries.

Jodi Jacobson of the Centre for Health and Gender
Equity in the US said that, unlike the global gag, the
declaration on prostitution looked likely to be imposed
on US-based organisations as well as their subsidiaries
abroad. The office of Randall Tobias, the global Aids
coordinator who is responsi ble for spending the $15bn
President Bush promised for the fight against Aids, was
working on the language to be adopted, she said.

"Any organisation receiving US global Aids funding will
have to agree to the policy," she said. That would
include charities as large as Care, Save the Children
and World Vision.

"It is a hugely problematic policy from the standpoint
of public health alone. It goes against the entire
grain of public health principles in not judging the
people you are trying to reach."

But Sam Brownback, a leading Senate conservative, told
the Wall Street Journal: "Obviously Brazil has the
right to act however it chooses in this regard. We're
talking about promotion of prostitution which the
majority of both the house and the Senate believe is
harmful to women."

Most US Aids funding goes directly to organisations
working in the field and much will be channelled
through faith organisations that back the no-abortion,
pro-abstinence and anti-prostitution stance of the US
neo-conservatives.

But the Brazilian government has strong HIV/Aids
policies and insists that all negotiations go through
its own committee. It also has a strong partnership
between government and non-governmental organisations
that encouraged a united response to Washington.

"This would be entirely in contradiction with Brazilian
guidelines for a programme that has been working very
well for years. We are providing condoms, and doing a
lot of prevention work with sex workers, and the rate
of infection has stabilised and dropped since the
1980s," said Sonia Correa, an Aids activist in Brazil
and co-chair of the International Working Group on
Sexuality and Social Policy.

"The US is doing the same in other countries -
bullying, pushing and forcing - but not every country
has the possibility to say no."

Adrienne Germain, president of the International
Women's Health Coalition, said: "The importance of the
Brazilian government decision can not be overstated."
Guardian Unlimited (c) Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005

_______________________________________________________

portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a news,
discussion and debate service of the Committees of
Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It aims to
provide varied material of interest to people on the
left.

For answers to frequently asked questions:
<http://www.portside.org/faq>

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change settings:
<http://lists.portside.org/mailman/listinfo/portside>

To submit material, paste into an email and send to:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (postings are moderated)

For assistance with your account:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To search the portside archive:
<http://people-link5.inch.com/pipermail/portside/>

Reply via email to