<div>Here are five more interesting responses received.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">from Alicia Yamin, HHRJ, </font><a href="mailto:ayamin@law.harvard.edu"><font face="Times New Roman" color="#0000ff" size="3">ayamin@law.harvard.edu</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> :</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> </font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I'm delighted that this issue of the Journal has sparked such an interesting and important exchange. Alison, if you have been reading the new Journal since Vol. 10:1, you will of course know that the points you raise have been made by various authors, including myself. The issue of global architecture is an extremely important one and indeed one that will be centrally addressed in our forthcoming issue on international assistance and cooperation/non-state actors. Alison, I would like to encourage you to think about submitting a piece for that issue. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> </font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Additionally, as we have repeatedly stated to Claudio, we are very eager to have a dedicated PHM blog perspective appear on the Journal site. The subject of how human rights addresses the transnational forces structuring power relations could be a great one to start with.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> </font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">from Wim Deceukelaire </font><a href="mailto:wimathome@gmail.com"><font face="Times New Roman" color="#0000ff" size="3">wimathome@gmail.com</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">:<br>
<br>I get the point and share Alison’s concern. Of course you're right that we have to insist that exploitation and oppression have to be addressed before anything else. On the other hand it is but right to call for the industrialized countries to pay and compensate for the havoc they've wreaked. It is a maybe secondary point. But then, it is badly needed to respond to the most immediate needs of the people. In that context, we shouldn't be afraid to advocate the "duty to assist" that makes part of the human rights instruments, as long as we make clear it is far from enough and isn't even the start of a solution.<br>
<br>What bothers me more is the reference to "international systems of financing", especially if it refers to global funds and other charity initiatives. The human rights framework derives its strength from the fact that it clearly identifies the State as the duty-bearer. All benefits that working people have been able to get were the result of the struggle of social movements that asserted people's rights vis-a-vis the State. European social security is a case in point. Today, we see a discourse emerging that is also claiming the human rights framework, but that is advocating global-fund-like initiatives as alternatives. The struggle is not a matter anymore of the people claiming their rights from the State, but it becomes a matter of politely requesting alms from Bill Gates. You might call it the privatization of the right to health. It's a pity that this kind of thinking is passed as human rights framework. As activists we'd better be vigilant about that.<br>
<br>In this light, I'd also be glad for phm-exch readers to read, comment and critique our article on participation and empowerment that appears in the same issue of the HHR journal.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> </font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">From George Kent </font><a href="mailto:kent@hawaii.edu"><font face="Times New Roman" color="#0000ff" size="3">kent@hawaii.edu</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> :</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">I don’t agree with Alison’s position here, or maybe I just don’t understand it well enough. In the book on <i>Global Obligations for the Right to Food</i>, we argued that, under a concentric circles model of rings of responsibility, there are many layers of responsibility for care for the needy, beginning with the immediate family and community, and continuing on up to the global community.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">This implies that we are all responsible for all us in some measure. The task is to figure out in what ways. To me it seems evident that those who have greater resources have a greater responsibility to provide material assistance to the needy.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Sometimes that assistance is managed badly, in various ways. I discussed this in <i>Freedom from Want</i>, especially in pp. 120-125 (available at </font><a href="http://press.georgetown.edu/pdfs/9781589010550.pdf" target="_blank"><font face="Times New Roman" color="#0000ff" size="3">http://press.georgetown.edu/pdfs/9781589010550.pdf</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">) I take this to mean that assistance should be done well, not that assistance in general should be ended.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">In other words, I too am “STILL saying that if the poor countries can’t afford it, then the international community must step in.”</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Maybe the neediness is in fact there, largely because of the badly flawed international architecture, as Alison suggests. But that is not something that is going to be easily remedied. We can recognize that it is badly flawed, and also at the same time recognize that the current world is one of severe inequalities, one in which many needy people should be getting help now from those who are not needy. We can’t ask the needy to wait for the international system to get fixed.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">I would say there are many sensible paths to take in working for greater justice in the world, and we should not fault anyone for choosing a different path.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Alison’s quotation, “When I give food to the hungry, they call me a saint. But when I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist” is from Dom Helder Camara. I have it on a poster that I used to use in lectures.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> </font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">From Ronald Labonte </font><a href="mailto:rlabonte@uottawa.ca"><font face="Times New Roman" color="#0000ff" size="3">rlabonte@uottawa.ca</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> :</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d"><font face="Times New Roman">This is an interesting exchange, and Alison makes some very good points. A HR argument for international financing should not be made without a critique, and recommendations for transformation, of the rules of the global economic systems (trade, finance) that uphold gross economic inequities. At the same time, the legacy of colonialism and other political histories has carved the world into a multitude of countries, many of which are too small and/or lacking in resources to have the capacities (assuming just governments and a strong civil society to keep and hold them to account) to meet basic health and human needs in any ethically reasonable time. Just as federated states (and to some extent, the EU) transfer some residue of wealth between ‘have’ and ‘have less’ regions to create more equity in social infrastructures (creating more ‘equality of opportunity’), global systems of wealth transfers must also be created, strengthened and removed from the political vagaries of wealthier nations (i.e. rendered somewhat more bureaucratic and needs-based rather than politically-based). In sum, I don’t believe it is either/or; it is both/and. I also rather suspect that, if the question was posed this way, both Alison and Anand would concur.</font></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"></font> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">From Matt Anderson </font><a href="mailto:bronxdoc@gmail.com"><font face="Times New Roman" color="#0000ff" size="3">bronxdoc@gmail.com</font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> :</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><br><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">I cannot help but agree with Alison. I think that Anand's comments - and admittedly I have only read this quote - are really quite confused. Either he believes his own rhetoric or he is being deliberately confusing.<br>
<br>Let's take the "global fund" question. My comments here will be influenced by my first-hand involvement in Guatemala. HIV has always been an exceptional disease with a very particular activist community behind it. In Guatemala there is not a "community" with activists interested in tuberculosis and I don't see one forming, particularly in the highly undemocratic context. So where is this "organic" community that is going to address tuberculosis? Is it hundreds of independent Indian villages?<br>
<br>I think we would all agree that the "organic" structure that should be addressing HIV, TB and malaria is the Guatemalan state. The global fund's end-run around the State, by financing NGO's just further discredits the Guatemalan government (and political solutions in general) and promotes NGOs (which you can call community if you wish, but I don't buy that). It feeds the widespread Guatemalan cynicism that all politicians are corrupt and nothing good can come of government. This is the fertile soil for neoliberal thinking. Is Anand Grover promoting this model? Probably not.<br>
<br>On the ground in Guatemala we see that while we now have HIV medicines available, we don't have any way of getting them to pregnant women since 40% of women get no or very minimal prenatal care. In other words, public health solutions have to be at the national level, not at the disease level.<br>
<br>Finally, I would strongly endorse Alison's comments about foreign aid. With what possible moral right does the US government which tried to overthrow the Chavez government and actually overthrow the Aristide government (not once but twice!!) talk about giving money to support international human rights. That money is - and has always been - a cover for promoting pro-US political factions overseas. "Development money" is never disinterested. It is always about promoting the donor's economic interests.<br>
<br style="mso-special-character: line-break"><br style="mso-special-character: line-break"></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"> </font></p></div>