Week 6 Discussion

The chapters we read in Global Transformations: Politics Economics and Culture did not directly deal with HIV/AIDS or health crises per se, but I did find the discussion in chapter one about regimes (see pg. 51 for a definition of the term) to be pertinent to our research. Held, et al. describe the purpose of international regimes as "an expression of the necessity to find new modes of cooperation and regulation for collective problems." (51) It would appear that the creation of these international regimes, along with the explosion of the number of international non-governmental organizations (INGO) have assisted the and in fact led the fight against HIV/AIDS internationally. Groups like the World Health Organization or UNAIDS have become the primary resources and hubs of information concerning the global AIDS crisis.

Nations around the world have understood that a Westphalian approach to the problem will do nothing, as HIV crosses political and territorial borders with ease. (In fact, I would argue that it has been the globalization of international travel primarily via airlines that has made the global spread of AIDS possible.) A more creative, concerted, and multilateral approach to addressing the problem must be taken. Thus nations and INGOs have adopted a certain set of international regimes to combat HIV/AIDS. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that we have discussed at length are a great example of an international regime. All the member states of the UN, many INGOs, and other international regimes such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have agreed to implement the goals together. This is not a case of international laws governing specific states, but an example of soveriegn nations and organizations agreeing to work together in a global village.

I was most impressed with the discussion about the human rights regime (65-70), especially the discussion of how certain INGOs like Amnesty International have taken international leadership for education, advocacy, and implementation of international human rights standards. I believe it is the ability of these INGOs to stand outside governments and apart from any conflict of interests that allow them to voice their prophetic statements. Governments are too intricately tied to various systems to be able to voice protest. This is not a general critique, rather an observation. Governments have to concern themselves with maintaining relationships for various reasons: be it to maintain trade, help in security, etc. The INGOs, however, are not tied to these other systems and thus can use their detached nature to call out areas of injustice where they see it. (In many ways, I believe these groups act as a great example from which churches can learn.) The story of Las Madres de Plazo de Mayo, "The Mothers of the Disappeared," (68) is a terrific example of an INGO exercising both authority and pressure on governments to institute justice in certain nations.

As we continue to look at HIV/AIDS, I believe that it will be imperative for churches to partner with these INGOs and other international regimes to affect change and to defeat the disease. Churches trying to work on their own will not be affective. I do not think it is necessary to start something from scratch since many groups such as World Vision or OXFAM have been working hard to network with governments and other INGOs to fight AIDS. The choice is not so much to start something altogether new, but to add numbers to the forces already in the battle.