hi all, <br>below is an interesting interview on G20 failure.......<br>read on<br>...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................<br>
<br>SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: A major international conference on global
AIDS policy is underway in Austria this week, and there appears to be a
growing a rift over funding by rich nations. Some 20,000 policymakers,
experts and advocates have gathered in Vienna for the weeklong
conference. On Sunday, hundreds of people marched through the conference
halls demanding rich nations meet their pledges to ensure universal
access to AIDS treatment.<br>
<br>Meanwhile, the head of the conference said world leaders lack the
political will to ensure that everyone infected with HIV and AIDS gets
treatment. Julio Montaner, the president of the International AIDS
Society and chair of the conference, criticized G8 countries for failing
to meet the UN’s Millennium Development Goals.<br>
<br> JULIO MONTANER: I cannot hide my profound disappointment and
deep frustration with the recently concluded GI and G20 meetings in
anywhere else but Canada, by failing to take—by failing to take full
responsibility for the universal access pledge, and, more importantly,
for failing to articulate the next steps to meet not just the six MDGs,
but also all of them, because without universal access, there shall be
no MDGs by 2015.<br>
<br><br>
SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Well, on Monday, former US president Bill Clinton
fired back and railed against what he called inefficient spending of
AIDS funds and said many countries are misspending foreign aid.<br>
<br> BILL CLINTON: In too many countries, too much money goes to
pay for too many people to go to too many meetings and get on too many
airplanes and do too many—to provide too much technical assistance. Too
much is spent on studies and reports that sit on shelves. And maybe when
we got all of the money in the world, this is regrettable, but not
tragic, but keep in mind, every dollar we waste today puts a life at
risk. It is time for the United States to lead the way and for other
governments to do similar soul searching and hardheaded analyses to see
how we can take a higher percentage of every country’s foreing aid
budget and actually spend it in the countries that the money was
appropriated for, on the people the money was designed to help, instead
of on the apparatus in the country in question.<br>
<br><br>
AMY GOODMAN: Clinton also called on aid groups to remember that the
current economic crisis is putting pressure on donations. A G8 report
from last month’s summit of world leaders in Canada acknowledged the
AIDS treatment targets will not be met by 2010.<br>
<br>Stephen Lewis is the former special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa. He
is the co-founder<br>
and co-director of AIDS-Free World, an international advocacy group
based here in New York. He’s joining us from the conference in Vienna.<br>
<br>Stephen Lewis, welcome to Democracy Now! Can you respond to
President Clinton?<br>
<br>STEPHEN LEWIS: Well, I think it’s probably fair to say, Amy, with a
slight variation on his words, that every dollar we waste today puts a
life at risk, and every dollar that the United States refuses to commit,
having made that commitment in the past, puts another life at risk. You
can’t have it both ways. And while my respect for the President is
inestimable, I thought that drawing undue attention to inefficiencies—we
all acknowledge inefficiencies—and taking issue perhaps rather strongly
with the protesters misses the mark.<br>
<br>This is a conference that understands that there are breakthroughs
coming. Treatment looks as though it leads to prevention. Just today at
the conference, we have an astonishing breakthrough on the discovery of a
microbicide. There is far more consciousness of injecting drug use.
There is a recognition of the concentrated epidemic about—among men who
have sex with men. We are on the cusp of moving the confrontation and
subduing of HIV and AIDS forward. And at precisely that moment in time,
the G8, in general, and the United States, in particular, decides to
flatline and cut back their budgets, and I cannot imagine anything more
reprehensible.<br>
<br>SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: And Stephen Lewis, you are the former UN
ambassador from Canada to the United Nations. You’re from Canada. The G8
was just held in Canada, and the price tag for that conference for the
security was something upwards of a billion dollars. How far short are
the G8 countries in their funding pledges for AIDS access—universal
access to treatment? And how does this compare overall to funding for
the G8 conference?<br>
<br>STEPHEN LEWIS: Well, the G8 conference funding was preposterous. We
actually spent more on funding three days of a conference than we
pledged for five years of assistance to maternal and child health. So if
anybody wants to understand how priorities are out of whack, that’s
pretty dramatic.<br>
<br>In terms of the shortfall, we are, at this moment in time, something
like $10 billion to $11 billion short of what is required in 2010, and
we will continue to be equal or greater amount short in the years
between now and 2015. And that, of course, is what is agitating this
AIDS conference, because we could be making breakthroughs, and yet the
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria will be desperately
underfunded at the replenishment conference this fall, and the
presidential initiative in the United States is flatlining.<br>
<br>I am, as you’ve identified, a Canadian, but it is hard for any of us
to believe, who put so much trust and confidence in the new president
of the United States, that this would be happening under the Obama
administration. It’s almost beyond the capacity of the mind to cope with
that George Bush seemingly was more engaged in the battle against HIV
than Barack Obama.<br>
<br>AMY GOODMAN: You said in a news conference just after the G8 summit
in your country, in Toronto, that the G8 are congenitally addicted to
betraying Africa. Why?<br>
<br>STEPHEN LEWIS: Why? Because the most obvious example recently,
although this goes back over thirty, forty or fifty years of structural
adjustment programs, berserk and lunatic economic applications, which
stripped the social sectors of Africa at the behest of the World Bank
and the International Monetary Fund—in terms of the G8 governments
themselves, in Gleneagles in 2005, they promised solemnly, they signed,
they swore in blood, as it were, that they would double the aid to
Africa, so that Africa would receive 25 billion additional dollars by
2010. And they have received something like $10 billion to $13 billion,
so they aren’t even halfway there. How can that be described as anything
other than a betrayal?<br>
<br>SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: And Ambassador Lewis, can you talk more about
this microbicide that’s getting a lot of attention now at the
conference and around the world?<br>
<br>STEPHEN LEWIS: Yes. We’ve been trying for so long—I say "we," that’s
presumptuous. The scientists have been trying for so long to discover a
vaccine or a microbicide. A microbicide is a gel or a foam or a cream,
vaginally applied for a period of time before and again after
intercourse, which can prevent transmission of the virus. And it gives
women some significant control over their own sexuality. We have made
some breakthroughs. There are intimations of progress in the realm of a
vaccine, but we’re still probably many years off.<br>
<br>Today, there was an announcement of a microbicide, a microbicide
which draws upon one of the antiretroviral drugs—it’s really very artful
and inspired—as a base for the foam or the gel or the cream. And it’s
showing over one year a 50 percent protection, and over two-and-a-half
years, a 39 percent protection. And that decline in protection is simply
a matter of adhering to the regimen, and that can be corrected. But
frankly, in the realm of preventive interventions, 39 percent, 50
percent, that’s astonishingly high at the start. And it means that as
they refine this microbial gel, it will get better and better, and it is
an exciting day for the science against the virus.<br>
<br>AMY GOODMAN: Ambassador Lewis, a World Bank study says payments to
girls in poor countries can slow the spread of HIV. Can you explain?<br>
<br>STEPHEN LEWIS: Yes. These are transfer payments from the central
government of countries to sustain families where girls are living in
child-headed households—that is, households where both parents have been
lost to the pandemic of AIDS and the oldest sibling in the family looks
after the younger siblings, or households which are looked after by
grandmothers, or girls who are having trouble staying in school because
they have to leave to look after sick and ailing parents. And if there
are transfer payments—and they can be extremely small, they can be just a
couple of dollars in the course of a month—it can allow a girl to stay
in school; it can allow for some further nutritious food for the family;
it can allow the young girl to begin to play too soon, too prematurely
in life, an adult role in the absence of parents, but a role which is
indispensable to her development and to the family’s survival.<br>
<br>SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: Well, on this issue of funding, Ambassador
Lewis, Clinton, in his comments, said that aid groups should remember
that countries are awash in trouble over the economic crisis, that
donations are more difficult to come by because of the recession. How
has the Obama administration responded to this criticism of funding?<br>
<br>STEPHEN LEWIS: Well, dare I describe that? I better say that I sit
on President Clinton’s Health Access Initiative board, and I think what
the Clinton Foundation done in Africa—has done in Africa and does in
Africa is possibly the most admirable intervention there is. So please
take what I’m about to say with the caution with which it’s imbued.
That’s a kind of neoliberal position for a neoliberal administration.
The truth of the matter is that when the financial crisis hit the United
States, President Obama and his colleagues were able to find some
trillions of dollars between a combination of stimulus funds, on the one
hand, and bailing out the banks, on the other, to maintain some kind of
economic equilibrium in the economy. I should point out that the banks
are now experiencing large profits again, and the economy is still in
terrible shape—witness the unemployment.<br>
<br>What we are asking for—let’s take the Global Fund as an example—is
one billion additional dollars per year for three years. That’s less
than one-tenth of one percent of the money that’s being spent on
stimulus and bailing out the banks. It is so microscopic as to be barely
discernible, and yet it would save millions of lives. I go back to
President Clinton’s statement that every dollar wasted puts a life at
risk. Every dollar the United States refuses to contribute, based on a
commitment which was made—President Obama, during the election campaign,
said he would provide—and he actually signed this, as did Hillary
Clinton, as did Joe Biden—$50 billion over five years for AIDS alone.
And they have retreated and backtracked from that dramatically. And
forgive me, but that will be counted in human lives.<br>
<br>AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Lewis, the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention here in the United States recently released a
first-of-its-kind analysis showing that 2.1 percent of heterosexuals
living in high-poverty urban areas in the United States are infected
with HIV. The analysis suggests that many low-income cities across the
United States now have generalized HIV epidemics, as defined by the UN
Joint Program on HIV/AIDS, UNAIDS. Your response?<br>
<br>STEPHEN LEWIS: Well, that’s, frankly, terrifying and deeply
upsetting. The definition of a generalized epidemic is anything over one
percent. To think that there are poor urban cores in the United States
that have over two percent is amazing. It’s heartbreaking. And, of
course, it is particularly pronounced amongst the African American
population, and there’s no question that women, African American women,
in the prime of their life, in their reproductive years, AIDS has now
become the single highest killer, not widely recognized.<br>
<br>So, the United States must have an internal indigenous policy which
is as strong as some of the international policies are. And President
Obama, to be fair, has just announced a new policy applicable to the
United States. The activist advocates, who have achieved so much, are
critical of that policy. They don’t think it’s adequately funded, and
they’re not sure, they’re not confident, of its implementation. And
indeed, President Clinton, in his speech, pointed out that there were
some thousands of people on the waiting list for treatment, even in the
United States. That again takes one’s breath away.<br>
<br>So you see, on so many fronts, this international emergency, whose
carnage is indescribable in the world, with 33 million people still
living with AIDS, the passivity, the indifference, the criminal and the
delinquence in the response that continues, when we’ve made progress.
And we could turn it around. Why, in Heaven’s name, are they slowing
down now?<br>
<br>AMY GOODMAN: Stephen Lewis, we want to thank you very much for being
with us from Vienna, from the international AIDS conference. He’s
former special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, a former Canadian
ambassador to the United Nations, and co-director of AIDS-Free World, an
international AIDS advocacy group that’s based here in New York. <br>
<br><a href="http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/6655-stephen-lewis-on-the-g8g20-failure-to-deliver-on-aids.html">http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/6655-stephen-lewis-on-the-g8g20-failure-to-deliver-on-aids.html</a><br>