Is the HIV/AIDS Pandemic Exclusively a Third World Security Issue - Literature review Example

 There have been many philosophical and ethical arguments made in favour of a greater role for the West in combating HIV/AIDS in the developing world. However, the interest in combating HIV/AIDS from an international security standpoint has received comparably little attention. This is both surprising and unfortunate as, according to the United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, the condition “destroys the very fabric of what constitutes a state: individuals, families, communities, economic and socio-political institutions, and the military and police forces which guarantee the protection of state institutions.” While this statement may appear to be hyperbolic, there is a definite relationship between the level of security in a Third World state and the percentage of its population effected by HIV/AIDS. In 2000, the Clinton administration in the United States declared HIV/AIDS a national security threat. Speaking on behalf of the administration, Deputy White House press secretary Jim Kennedy told reporters on April 30 that the disease is "a legitimate and ongoing health concern with the potential to destabilize government." Unfortunately, despite the White House’s bold comments, little tangable action has been taken in recent years. While the Bush administration made significant and relatively unheralded financial contributions to the global fight against HIV/AIDS, their efforts alone did little for address either the roots of the problem or the real long term consequences of allowing this disease’s vicious spread to continue. However, despite the efforts of successive U.S. presidential administrations, the question whether this is a problem that limits itself to state boundaries - or one of global proportions - remains in dispute. For some fringe elements, the very existence of the disease has been questioned. Even Thabo Mbeki, President of South Africa from 1999 to 2008 has publicly challenged the standing, and widely accepted beliefs about HIV/AIDS and has argued that the HIV infection does not actually cause AIDS. I note this fact not to debate the validity of longstanding scientific research, but offer some insight into the controversies surrounding this issue. Much of this essay will focus on the challenges the HIV/AIDS pandemic poses to national and international security. However, in attempting to resolve this dispute, it would be useful to begin by examining our working definition of security. Benjamin Miller, in his paper The Concept of Security: Should it be Redlined?, argues that the Cold-War era definition of security has expired. The traditional exercise of identifying a threat and formulating an appropriate response is, in many cases, outdated. Miller contends that “a fundamental transformation is taking place in the international arena, and it is moving away from the traditional world of territorial sates, military threats and danger of war, and inter-state rivalry.” Miller is not alone in this view, but he is correct. A brief examination of the international security incidents of the last decade, with 9/11 featuring most prominently, shows that the vast majority of conflicts have not been traditional inter-state rivalries. Today’s wars are waged against ideologies rather than states. It is also important to note that the weapons used have changed. Miller argues “that the security field should continue to deal with questions of violence and armed conflicts at different levels of intensity, but with a growing focus on both non-military causes of war and on the factors and conditions which affect peacemaking as a major security strategy.” Miller’s keen grasp on the need to focus on the factors and conditions which affect peacekeeping serves as an ample prelude to our discussions about the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In the post-9/11 age, Western society has often flooded with threats of biological and chemical warfare. Bioterrorism, a concept once limited to the pages of science fiction literature, is now regarded as a serious threat. In his paper, Toward Biological Security, Christopher Chyba spends much time listing relatively recent examples of outbreaks of dangerous diseases like smallpox in Iraq, Iran, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. He notes that, in the case of Yugoslavia, “To contain the resulting outbreak, Tito’s government vaccinated 18 million people and quarantined some 10,000 in commandeered hotels and apartment buildings ringed with troops and barbed wire.” Clearly, the government of Yugoslavia saw it fit to suspend basic civil liberties as a means of offsetting any further spreading of the diseases. Despite his apparent critique of the Yugoslavian response, Chyba also takes issue with America’s preparedness. Chybe reminds his readers that “ on September 11, 2001, the United States had fewer than 15 million doses of smallpox vaccine available to a larger and far more mobile society.” Chyba is drawing attention to a serious flaw in America’s emergency preparedness in the years before 9/11. However, these lessons need not apply to bioterrorism alone. In shifting his focus to the HIV/AIDS pandemic, Chyba argues the United States must do more than merely acknowledge the existence of the disease. With HIV/AIDS claiming the lives of more than 22 million globally thus far, it is illogical to ignore gravity of the situation. Chyba sets aside moral or ethical arguments for American intervention in Third World countries struggling with the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Rather, he focuses his argument from a national security perspective. Chyba recognizes that the United States cannot act unilaterally. According to Chyba, “rapid detection of outbreaks requires improvements in international disease surveillance.” While Chyba contends that HIV/AIDS pandemic is a national security issue, he does understand that is differs from a direct bioterrorist assault. Chyba writes that “an effective strategy for biological security will encompass non-proliferation, deterrence, and defence, but the required mix of these components will be very different from those in strategies for nuclear or even chemical weapons.” Chyba argues that the means to end the HIV/AIDS pandemic does not lie in military strategy, but in ongoing research in the biotechnology field. Thus far, we have demonstrated that the HIV/AIDS pandemic is a serious concern, as are similar diseases. While not necessarily related to HIV/AIDS, the Yugoslavian example which saw civil liberties suspended in order to battle the smallpox outbreak demonstrates the severity of the situation. However, those sceptics may still argue that the events in Yugoslavia, and HIV/AIDS ridden sub-Saharan Africa, are isolated incidents and not true global concerns. They will argue that the outbreak is unfortunate and there is definitely a role for charitable and aid organizations to play, but this is not an international security concern. This argument, likely stemming from a realist perspective, is powerful, but misguided. It would be worth spending some time rebuking such claims now. In their paper The Postcolonial Moment in Security Studies, Tarak Barkawi and Mark Laffey challenge the traditional conceptions of world politics. They open by acknowledging that much of the academic work surrounding global politics has been rather Eurocentric and have taken the view that “theories of international politics have been primarily concerned with great powers.” According to Barkawi and Laffey, policy makers and academics alike have been quick to “understate and misrepresent the role of what we now call the global South in security relations.” The global South referenced by Barkawi and Laffey includes some of the most HIV/AIDS infected regions on the planet. Since these regions are particularly relevant to out discussion, it would be worth examining exactly what their role is. Empirical evidence proves that the HIV/AIDS pandemic has played a direct role in the further destabilization of many of Africa’s weakest states. History is ripe with examples of weakened states turning into authoritarian or theocratic states. It is often these states, ones where authoritarian rulers have been able to capitalize on religious fanaticism and anti-Western sentiments, that become security threats. Present day Iran serves as a prime example. If the West continues to allow Africa to deteriorate it could quickly find itself have to quell the nuclear and territorial ambitions of four or five Iran-like states in Africa. Therefore, it is essential that the United States and it’s Western allies are vigilant in their support of democracy and strong institutions in Africa’s emerging states. Currently, this support is not as strong as it could be. For the future of Africa to be a prosperous one, even moderately so, military efforts and peacekeeping missions designed to stabilize the region must be successful. Currently, HIV/AIDS is now the leading cause of death among solders, peacekeepers and police officers in several African countries. Training armed forces is costly and time consuming. In a continent like Africa, which suffers from such a high mortality rate and extreme levels of poverty, they are also difficult to replace. As HIV/AIDS continues to spread, the pool upon which the state can draw upon soldiers and law enforcement officers is becoming smaller and smaller. It is no secret that there exists a direct relationship between numbers of security personnel available and crime levels in many African cities. The HIV/AIDS pandemic also puts Third World economies at risk. Robert Ostergard and Matthew Tubin make this point in their recent paper HIV/AIDS and South Africa’s National Security. Using South Africa as an example, Ostergard and Tubin make the case that the HIV/AIDS pandemic is having a direct negative effect on South Africa’s economy and likely others. According to Ostergard and Tubin, “South Africa’s political and economic security has been compromised from the strain the epidemic has placed on resources and manpower.” They go on to add that “South Africa’s ability to be the bedrock of regional stability will continue to diminish as resources and manpower are drained from the foreign policy and military institutions needed to carry out such expectations.” This would be devastating, but not only to South Africa. It is in the best interest of the entire African continent that South Africa survives. For decades now, South Africa has stood as a symbol of stability in a trouble region. South Africa, being one of the founding members of the African Union, has emerged as a continental leader. South Africa alone counts for approximately 30 percent of the continent’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and its collapse would be accompanied by a widespread economic crisis. There is also some evidence that suggests that, in the case of Africa, poorer economies result in increased violence. The end of the Cold War saw a significant decrease in foreign aid spending in Africa as the major powers were no longer competing for influence in the region. Many African nations had become dependent on this funding and had a difficult time adjusting without it. Since the end of the Cold War, civil wars have been waged in the African Great Lakes region, Somalia, Sudan, Mozambique, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, and Guinea-Bissau. International conflicts in Africa have been on the rise as well. The First and Second Congo wars between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and its neighbours as well as the Ethiopian conflict serve as primary examples. Steven David, in his paper Explaining the Third World Alignment, argues that the lack of proper military and security personnel in much of the developing world has created the kind of conditions that allow for unstable and ineffective regimes to develop. David says “the notion of a legitimate government protecting its citizens from private acts of violence does not apply: for large groups of people in the Third World the government is neither legitimate nor a protector.” David also argues that the West has much to learn from studying the Third World. For David, the relevancy of the developing world to Western nations is ever increasing. According to David, “because conventional warfare has essentially become a Third World monopoly, it is impossible to understand the causes and possible solutions if international conflict without understanding the Third World.” David goes on to explain the dangers associated with ignoring the Third World. He warns that “approximately a dozen Third World countries have chemical or biological weapons” and several Third World countries “are close to obtaining or have nuclear weapons”. It is also worth noting that David’s paper was originally published in 1991. Almost two decades have passed since the original publication of Explaining the Third World Alignment and it would be reasonable to assume that the startling statistics have only climbed even higher. As David notes, a perilously high percentage of the world’s weaponry rests in the hands of Third World leaders. Since they are unlikely for forfeit their weaponry willingly, it becomes imperative to ensure that they are operating in a politically stable environment. Since the HIV/AIDS pandemic has directly contributed to the social and institutional determination of many Third World countries in Africa, it becomes evident that the HIV/AIDS epidemic cannot be dismissed as purely being a Third World security issue. Not only would doing so be misguided, but it would fail to recognize the long-term potential for these fragile states to fail and fall into anarchy. If history is to repeat itself, as it often does, this could very likely result in a violent force overtaking the state and causing strife for the international community. A number of authors have pointed to the fact that the HIV/AIDS pandemic has resulted in a vast increase in the number of orphans in the sub-Saharan region of Africa. These orphans, unable to cope, may be subject to exploitation and radicalization. The methods used by the leads of Al Quesada and the Taliban could easily be applied to sub-Saharan Africa. This would make Africa a whole new front on the American led war on terror. While these comments may appear to be hyperbolic or exaggerated, we must not dismiss the possibility too quickly. Globalization has created a highly interconnected world where the security of one nation is dependent upon the security of others. Allowing the failure of African states to continue is, in itself, an international security concern. Then HIV/AIDS pandemic is quickly creating the necessary conditions for the type of social and political collapse that inevitably results in conflict. Fortunately, the international community still has time to act, but the work must begin immediately. Bibliography. Chyba, Christoper. “Toward Biological Security”. Foreign Affairs. Volume 81. Number 3. (2002) Print. Barkawi, Tarak, and Laffey, Mark.. “The Postcolonial Moment in Security Studies.” British International Stuides Association. Volume 32, Number 10. (2006) Print. Miller, Benjamin. “The Concept of Security: Should it be Redefined?” Journal of Strategic Studies. Volume 24, Number 2. (2001) Print. David, Steven. “Explaining the Third World Alignment.” World Politics. Volume 43, Number 2. (1991) Print. Ostergard, Robert, and Tubin, Matthew. “HIV/AIDS and South Africa’s National Security.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, March 5th, 2005 Chowka, Peter. “AIDS deemed a ‘National Security Threat’ by U.S. as South African President challenges medical orthodoxy”. Natural Healthline May 1st 2000. Print. HIV/AIDS and Security. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS Fact Sheet. August 2003. URL: http://data.unaids.org/Topics/Security/fs_security_en.pdf Read More