Dear Colleague:
The latest United Nations conference on Population and Development did not
adopt code words for abortion rights, but didn't shift course on failed
policies on AIDS prevention, either. Our own Joseph D'Agostino attended
the conference and, together with many others, fought the population
controllers to a draw this time around.
Steven W. Mosher
President
PRI Weekly Briefing
22 April 2005
Vol. 7 / No. 15
United Nations Conference Wraps Up without Controversy
By Joseph A. D'Agostino
The United Nations Commission on Population and Development (CPD)
concluded its conference on HIV/AIDS at UN headquarters in New York, and
pro-lifers are satisfied with the results. Thanks to the efforts of the
U.S. delegation, National Right to Life and its UN representative Jeanne
Head, the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, volunteers including
those from PRI, and others, no expansion of language that could include
the "right" to abortion was included in the final resolutions passed by
the conference on April 14.
The phrases "reproductive rights" and "reproductive health services" were
removed from the final drafts. These phrases have been interpreted by UN
agencies and other international organizations to include abortion.
Pro-abortion delegates' failure to include them in these latest documents
is a sign that pressure from the Bush Administration, pro-life Third World
governments, and pro-life non-governmental organizations (NGOs) is
working. Could it be that the United Nations doesn't want to endure
another controversy? Or is it merely biding its time until the next U.S.
administration?
The U.S. delegation stood up against abortion at this conference, with
particular help from Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Egypt, and the Holy See.
Ambassador Sichan Siv, the U.S. representative to CPD's parent UN
Committee on Economic and Social Development, gave a statement to the
conference on its last day. He referred to two previous conferences that
had already laid the foundations for what the UN has been doing in the
area of population and development. "The United States reaffirms the
goals and objectives of the International Conference on Population and
Development (ICPD)," said Siv. "Our position towards its implementation
is contingent on several understandings. These documents constitute an
important policy framework that does not create international legal
rights, including any right to abortion. Nor does it create any legally
binding obligations on states under international law. Based on
consultations this week and in other fora, we further interpret that
states do not take ICPD or the ICPD+5 outcome documents to constitute
support, endorsement, or promotion of abortion."
At the same time, however, the conference endorsed the same old failed
policies that have not checked the rapid spread of HIV in the Third World
over the past 20 years. "Reproductive health" including condoms, explicit
sex education, and "gender equality" were pushed as the solutions to
sub-Saharan Africa's massive AIDS problem, with some mentions of
abstinence as well. We know where the money actually goes: to condoms, to
contraceptive injections and pills, to sex ed, and to re-education
programs that supposedly "empower" women-the same programs that have not
prevented many African nations from having adult HIV infection rates at
astounding levels, up to 38%.
Why was the CPD focusing on AIDS, anyway? And why do AIDS prevention
programs resemble so closely now-waning international population control
programs? After all, like AIDS prevention programs, population control
programs distribute contraceptives of all types, "gender equality"
programs (pushing married women and mothers into the workforce so they
will have fewer children), and "reproductive health," usually including
abortion.
There is little doubt that AIDS prevention programs are being used as a
Trojan Horse to achieve the goal of population control. In a paper
presented March 2002 to another UN Economic and Social Development
conference, Steven W. Sinding explained the rationale. He complained that
people and moneyed elites had no interest in increasing the funding of
population control programs the way they used to. (Perhaps they believe
that increased funding isn't necessary as fertility rates drop below
replacement level in most parts of the world.) He wrote, "It seems to me
unlikely that this trend away from concern about high fertility will be
reversed and that external assistance for programs to reduce fertility
will once again increase. Funding is likely to be available in the coming
years, perhaps even in more generous amounts than in the past, to promote
health sector reform and to deal with such pressing health problems as
HIV/AIDS. Some of this funding may strengthen services that promote
sexual and reproductive health and could, as a consequence, help to reduce
unwanted fertility."
There you have it: AIDS prevention programs can have the benefit of
reducing the number of Third World people-especially if "reproductive
health" is their focus. A few months after submitting this paper, Sinding
became Director-General of the International Planned Parenthood Federation
(IPPF), where he remains to this day.
Other than making a few rhetorical nods toward abstinence for youth, the
UN conference ignored the most important causes of the spread of AIDS in
Africa: unnatural acts and unsanitary medical practices. Michael Fumento,
who has been writing about the myths surrounding the highly politicized
AIDS epidemic for many years, echoed the arguments that PRI has been
making for a long time in an article he wrote that was published on the
last day of the conference:
"Ninety-nine per cent of AIDS and HIV cases in Africa come from sexual
transmission, virtually all heterosexual," he wrote. "So says the World
Health Organization, with other agencies toeing the line. Massive condom
airdrops accompanied by a persuasive propaganda campaign would practically
make the epidemic vanish overnight. Or would it? A determined renegade
group of three scientists has fought for years-with little success-to get
out the message that no more than a third of HIV transmission in Africa is
from sexual intercourse and most of that is anal." He quotes one of the
scientists as asserting that among the primary vectors for HIV in Africa
are "contaminated punctures from such sources as medical injections,
dental injections, surgical procedures, drawing as well as injecting
blood, and rehydration through IV tubes."
PRI's own 68-page report (for more information, go to
www.pop.org)
explains how reproductive health programs, which encourage, for example,
self-injection with Depo-Provera, are contributing to the spread of AIDS
in Africa.
Making a distinction between natural and unnatural sexual acts is anathema
to UN diplomats and bureaucrats, and admitting that First World-funded
health clinics could be contributing to the spread of AIDS would be a
major embarrassment. Don't hold your breath waiting for the United
Nations to do something effective about HIV in Africa. It remains
obsessed about driving down African birth rates.
Joseph A. D'Agostino is Vice President for Communications at PRI.
_________
PRI
P.O. Box 1559
Front Royal, VA 22630
USA
Phone: (540) 622-5240 Fax: (540) 622-2728
Email: jad@pop.org
Media Contact: Joseph A. D'Agostino
(540) 622-5240, ext. 204
_________
© 2005 Population Research Institute. Permission to reprint granted.
Redistribute widely. Credit required.
_________
If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation to PRI, please go to
https://pop.org/donate.cfm. All
donations (of any size) are welcomed and
appreciated.
_________
To subscribe to the Weekly Briefing, send an email to:
JOIN-PRI@Pluto.Sparklist.com
or email pri@pop.org and say "Add me to your
Weekly Briefing."
__________
The Population Research Institute is dedicated to ending human rights
abuses committed in the name of "family planning," and to ending
counter-productive social and economic paradigms premised on the myth of
"overpopulation."