|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Medicine
& Health : HIV
/ AIDS
AIDS in Africa: an indictment of an outmoded social order
By Fred Mazelis
16 August 2000
Use
this version to print
The 13th International Conference on AIDS, held in Durban,
South Africa last month, highlighted the social catastrophe unfolding
on the African continent. The meeting took place in the country
with the largest number of people infected by HIV, the virus that
causes AIDS, on the continent that is home to 70 percent of the
world's HIV-infected population.
Of the estimated 35 million around the world who are living
with HIV/AIDS, 25 million come from the sub-Saharan region. While
this area contains about 10 percent of the world's population,
80 percent of the 2.8 million who died of AIDS last year come
from the sub-Saharan countries.
Seven countries in the region have HIV infection rates of greater
than 20 percent. In most of these areas, according to the United
Nations agency Unaids, one-third of today's 15-year-olds will
die of the disease. At the present rate, 10 years from now life
expectancy is predicted to be between 30 and 35 years of age in
Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe, roughly half what
it would be without AIDS.
Many other countries in the region will also be devastated.
An entire generation will be decimated by the epidemic.
In terms of the deadliness and persistence of this disease,
the only comparison is the Black Plague, which killed 100 million
or more in the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries. Twenty-five
million died in little more than a year in the 1918 influenza
pandemic, but, unlike HIV, that killer virus vanished within 18
months.
Medicine has made enormous strides in the past century, especially
in dealing with infectious disease. Despite the progress made
in understanding as well as in treatment of AIDS in the 20 years
since it first emerged, however, it killed nearly 3 million last
year, and the vast majority of the world's people remain at its
mercy.
This trajectory of the AIDS epidemic has been visible for some
time. At the 1998 meeting the scale of the human tragedy was very
clear. The epidemic has been worsening in Africa and elsewhere,
even as new treatments have drastically reduced the death rates
in Europe and North America.
The response from the world's major economic powers and the
giant pharmaceutical companies has been either silence or platitudes.
Last year the imperialist creditors of the Third World promised
to forgive $100 billion in debt. Even this gesture, amounting
to a tiny fraction of the trillions owed to international institutions
and banks, has come with conditions attached and has barely begun
to be implemented.
In the context of the latest international conference, more
attention has been focused on the crisis in Africa than ever before.
The connection between AIDS and the growing social inequality
of the past two decades is also being grasped by greater numbers
of people, and it has become increasingly difficult for the ruling
elites in Washington, New York, London and other major capitals
to ignore.
The major powers might wish to quarantine Africa, to let it
succumb to its fate, but the spread of HIV has made this impossible.
AIDS is spreading even more rapidly in Eastern Europe and the
former Soviet Union than in Africa. In China the number of HIV-infected
grew by an estimated 60 percent last year, and there are now 600,000
mainland Chinese who carry the virus. India, the world's second
most populous nation, is also on the brink of mass infection.
If these countries were to face a rate of infection such as that
existing in South Africa, it could lead to hundreds of millions
of people condemned to an early death.
Furthermore, with the growth of economic globalization, travel,
migration and tourism, the spread of HIV threatens to spill over,
or more precisely to attack again, in the wealthier countries,
including those which have made strides in reducing both deaths
and infection over the past decade. Even more important, as far
as Western capitalist interests are concerned, is the threat of
social and political explosions in huge areas of the world. These
would have, in legal language, a material adverse effect
on capitalist investment and trade.
The imperialist policymakers are motivated above all by questions
of their own security. The US Central Intelligence Agency summed
up its concerns in a special report issued last January, These
(infectious) diseases will endanger US citizens at home and abroad,
threaten US armed forces deployed overseas, and exacerbate social
and political instability in key countries and regions in which
the United States has significant interests.
These considerations are behind a flurry of new initiatives
over the past few months. Last May five giant pharmaceutical firms
from the US, Britain and Germany offered to discuss voluntary
cuts of as much as 80 percent in the prices of anti-retroviral
drugs used in the treatment of AIDS. One company, Glaxo Wellcome,
proposed to cut the cost of one of its drugs from $16 a pill to
$2. And right after the conclusion of the AIDS conference in July,
the US Export-Import Bank, a government agency financed by Congress,
announced that it was prepared to offer sub-Saharan nations $1
billion in annual loans to finance the purchase of AIDS drugs
and medical services.
The public relations objective behind the US announcement was
bluntly revealed by James Harmon, the president of the Export-Import
Bank, who piously declared that this is at least a first
step in showing the world that Africa is important to the United
States and that we can make a dent in this terrible problem.
The US proposal is a fraud. First of all, the millions of afflicted
cannot afford even a $2 pill daily, under conditions in many of
them exist on less than the equivalent of $2 a day.
Nor is it simply a matter of the distribution of drugs, although
that is certainly needed. These countries require means of providing
modern medical care to the tens of millions who need it. The HIV-infected
would need to be tested to determine the efficacy of their treatment.
Side effects would have to be monitored and treated as well. A
whole medical and social infrastructure would have to be built
up where it barely existed even before being overwhelmed by the
AIDS epidemic.
The loan proposal is cynically aimed, not so much at meeting
the needs of those facing death from AIDS, but at protecting the
profits of the US drug companies. A condition for receiving the
$1 billion in loans being offered by Washington would be that
the money be spent on drugs and services from US firms. So huge
are the profit margins on the anti-retroviral drugs that even
at the lower prices these pharmaceutical giants will still make
a profit. The US proposal will also protect the patents of these
huge corporations, preventing the African nations from purchasing
generic versions elsewhere.
Moreover, under conditions in which the interest on external
debt paid annually by these countries is already about four times
what they spend on health or education, the proposal that they
take on billions more in debt, at interest rates of about 7 percent,
is a cruel mockery of the needs of the hundreds of millions of
desperately impoverished people in sub-Saharan Africa.
If none of the proposals from Washington, the United Nations
or other capitals even begin to address themselves to the enormity
of the AIDS challenge, it is not simply because of the intentions
of individuals or the greed of individual corporations and their
CEOs. The pharmaceutical firms are part of a system of production
for profit in which they either deliver maximum return to their
shareholders or they see their competitive position undermined
and their stock prices collapse. There is a direct conflict between
the profit system itself and the most basic human needs, in this
case the need for medical treatment to save millions of lives.
Precisely because none of the governments, companies or international
institutions can address this, their spokesmen are engaged in
a jockeying for position. Some of the mutual finger-pointing that
took place at the AIDS conference had the effect of diverting
attention from the real issues.
There was understandable consternation and outrage at South
African President Thabo Mbeki's refusal to acknowledge HIV as
the cause of AIDS. Mbeki's purpose, in falsely counterposing the
importance of poverty as a factor in the spread of illness to
the role of HIV itself, was to deflect attention from the bankruptcy
of his own government, and that of Nelson Mandela preceding him,
in dealing with the crisis.
The end of apartheid less than 10 years ago, followed by the
election of Mandela to the presidency, was used to create the
myth of a peaceful solution to the struggle of black South Africans.
In fact nothing was changed fundamentally as far as the poverty
and social misery facing the great majority of the South African
people is concerned. Political power was transferred, not to the
masses, but to a black elite sharing power with and being incorporated
into the South African ruling capitalist class.
Mbeki, along with every other national bourgeois leader in
sub-Saharan Africa, is incapable of mounting any challenge to
the domination of the giant multinationals around the globe. He
is desperate to cover up his own bankruptcy and complicity in
the disaster now befalling the country. Hence his use of nationalist
demagogy, calling for an African solution to an African
problem.
Scientists and health workers were justifiably angered by Mbeki's
speech in Durban. But the official of the World Bank, who accused
the South African leadership of irresponsibility that borders
on criminality, was guilty of monstrous hypocrisy as he
sought to use Mbeki to divert attention from the role of the banks
and multinationals.
The crisis in South Africa and throughout the region is the
clearest expression of the reality of global capitalism as it
enters the twenty-first century. It is no coincidence that the
spread of AIDS has coincided with the structural adjustment
programs through which the International Monetary Fund and the
World Bank have saddled dozens of countries with trillions of
dollars in debt. Poverty and malnutrition have skyrocketed. Reductions
in spending for education and health care have left masses of
people ignorant of basic health issues, unable to receive treatment
for other diseases which have been shown to increase their susceptibility
to HIV infection.
The growth of poverty has led to the internal migration of
many millions of men seeking work. The breakdown in family structure
has led to the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, above
all AIDS, among women forced into prostitution and men seeking
sex far from home. Superstition and cultural backwardness, including
the myth that a man can be cured of HIV infection through sex
with a virgin, has been encouraged and has led to further spread
of the disease.
What is needed to conduct the fight against AIDS is no great
mystery. Tens of billions of dollars would be required to bring
the latest medical treatment to the millions who need it, along
with a massive health education program and the provision of decent
medical care and preventive medicine. A coordinated international
campaign could save millions of lives over the next decade, along
with sharply reducing the rate of infection.
At the same time, a commitment is needed to provide all the
resources necessary to secure a vaccine against HIV in the shortest
possible time. The search for a vaccine has been hampered by scientific
obstacles having to do with the complex ability of HIV to mutate,
but also because profit-making medicine is oriented far more toward
the lucrative drug medications.
It should be clear that there is no purely national solution
to the AIDS crisis. The comments by such figures as Nelson Mandela
and Peter Piot, the chief of the Unaids agency, calling for a
nationally driven campaign against HIV/AIDS are a
clear signal that they will do nothing to expose the responsibility
of global capitalism and to demand a global struggle against the
disease.
The magnitude of the challenge calls for the nationalization
of the drug companies and the health care industry. The giant
corporations, which have the power of life or death over billions
of people, must be transformed into public institutions under
the democratic control of the all working people. The supremacy
of the capitalist market must be rejected in favor of a systematic
plan, which harnesses all of humanity's resources in this campaign.
When the Black Plague struck, the world was not equipped to
fight back. Today, when the weapons are at hand to fight the new
plague, capitalism prevents their utilization.
There is only one force in the world which can lead this struggle
on behalf of all humanity. The international working class has
no stake in the profit system. It must fight for the reorganization
of economic life to meet the needs of all. The struggle against
AIDS has come to symbolize the struggle against the outmoded social
relations of capitalism, which is leading to social devastation
of literally genocidal proportions.
See Also:
South Africa: AIDS conference
accepts limited agenda
[29 July 2000]
UN report on AIDS paints a
picture of devastationPart 1
[17 July 2000]
UN report on AIDS paints a
picture of devastation-Part 2
[18 July 2000]
South Africa: The ANC government
and the AIDS crisis
[5 July 2000]
CIA says Africa's AIDS epidemic
is a "national security" issue
[21 June 2000]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |