The Global Fund announced last week it was suspending all its aid to Uganda, citing a PricewaterhouseCoopers report alleging financial improprieties in the implementation of Uganda's Round 1 HIV/AIDS grant. The Global Fund cut all five grants -- suspending care for tuberculosis and malaria, putting innocents at risk for no apparent reason, even though no allegations have been made regarding mismanagement of those grants. (The Global Fund explains the across the board cuts by saying all are managed by the same unit of the Ugandan government.)
The cuts follow sharp criticism of Uganda's program -- not because it is failing; it is one of Africa's most successful -- but because it puts morality (monogamy and abstinence) first and condoms second.
The Global Fund's website, on their About the Global Fund>>How the Fund Works page, lists their general principles, which include, "Support programs that reflect national ownership," "Operate in a balanced manner in terms of different regions, diseases and interventions," and "Pursue an integrated and balanced approach to prevention and treatment."
With these as their guiding principles, a person might reasonably expect the Global Fund to reward countries whose programs are working. A person with this expectation, however, would be disappointed.
Uganda's program reflects national ownership, because they are certainly the only African nation promoting monogamy and abstinence as their prevention program targeted at AIDS/HIV. It is a uniquely Ugandan program, and Uganda's success is likewise unique.
Uganda's program also gives the Global Fund an opportunity to "operate in a balanced manner in terms of different... interventions," since all the other African nations receiving aid from the Global Fund have condom-distribution programs.
Finally, Uganda's program reflects a "balanced approach to prevention and treatment." Prevention in terms of abstinence outside of marriage, and treatment in terms of HIV medications.
Back to CheatSeekingMissiles:
While it is possible that corruption exists in the Uganda program, it is even more likely that it is just as rampant elsewhere in less successful programs, given the host of corrupt countries receiving grants: Congo, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Haiti, Iran, Venezuela, Sudan, Vietnam and many more.
That is why I've theorized that the true cause for the suspension is pressure from anti-abstinence, morality and monogamy groups like George Soros' Human Rights Watch.
His theory is supported by this Reuters article available at Breitbart.com:
By Andrew Quinn
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - The U.S. government's emphasis on abstinence-only programs to prevent AIDS is hobbling Africa's battle against the pandemic by downplaying the role of condoms, a senior U.N. official said on Monday.
Stephen Lewis, the U.N. secretary general's special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, said fundamentalist Christian ideology was driving Washington's AIDS assistance program known as PEPFAR with disastrous results, including condom shortages in Uganda.
Uganda had been praised for cutting HIV infection rates to around 6 percent today from 30 percent in the early 1990s, a rare success story in Africa's battle against the disease.
Uganda's State Minister for Health Mike Makula told the Monitor newspaper on Monday there was no condom shortage, saying the country had 65 million in stock and had ordered another 80 million for delivery soon.
"That there is a condom shortage in the country is just a rumor by people who want to spoil the image of this country," the newspaper quoted Makula as saying.
But Jodi Jacobson of the U.S.-based Center for Health and Gender Equity said the about-turn in Uganda's previous policy to promote condoms was having a real impact -- reducing availability of condoms and cutting consumer confidence in them.
"They are kow-towing to the (U.S.) fundamentalist right on this issue," Jacobson said.
So activists, like Jodi Jacobson and the UN's Stephen Lewis, would rather ignore the huge improvement in HIV infection rate and block the programs that brought about that improvement. They would rather allow more people to become infected again by pursuing policy that has no effect on HIV infection rates. Why? Because Uganda's program focuses on morality, something the "fundamentalist right" likes. And in the condom-activists' opinion, allowing the fundamentalist right to get their way is a fate worse than African people's death.
No comments:
Post a Comment