UN is failing nations in struggle
Greater solidarity with the Palestinians and Saharawis needs to be shown
AS SOUTH Africans, we are huge believers in the power of the UN to be a force for good, and an instrument to achieve a more humane and inclusive world.
We will never forget the wall of solidarity that generations of UN diplomats built behind the anti-apartheid movement, which certainly helped to move the tide of global public opinion.
But somehow this week, sitting in the UN General Assembly in New York, I felt that the global community of nations had collectively failed those engaged in bitter struggles for self-determination and freedom.
Solidarity with the Palestinians and Saharawis has not been as solid and robust as what many nations showed towards the South African liberation movements in the dark days of apartheid.
To be fair, post-apartheid South Africa has consistently been the loudest voice when it comes to reminding the world of these struggles and the need to urgently find solutions to them.
But the question is whether we have shown the same type of resolve that progressive nations across the world showed us when it came to taking a meaningful stand against colonialism and oppression.
Admirably, President Cyril Ramaphosa dedicated a part of his address to the UN General Assembly this week to the plight of the Palestinians, noting that they had endured suffering almost as long as the UN has existed. We know the Palestinians are in a worse situation than they ever have been in their history, and living under suffocating conditions.
This week, when the UN paid tribute to the immense contribution of Nelson Mandela in his centenary, we can’t help but reflect on how distressed he would have been over Palestine.
Mandla Mandela has taken up the mantle and championed the Palestinian cause as fervently as his grandfather had done, and used this week in particular to highlight the global inaction and lack of solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
While the UN General Assembly might have consistently passed resolutions calling for a two-state solution, it has failed to move the peace process forward or to compel the Israelis to withdraw their occupying forces. In fact, most of the Palestinian land has been annexed by the occupiers. What have we done wrong?
The time has come for bold new moves on the part of the international community to force a rethink in terms of the cost of the occupation.
To date, our own liberation movement came up with a move that is largely symbolic in nature, but sends a signal that the occupation is unacceptable and the status quo can no longer be tolerated.
In December, the ANC at its national conference took a decision to downgrade relations with Israel as a sign of protest. It is what could be done at a minimum under the current circumstances.
What drew the ire of activists across the country this week was the return to Tel Aviv of South Africa’s recalled ambassador to Israel, although the Department of International Relations clarified that he was there only to attend to family matters, not on official business.
The outcry led to cries of betrayal and accusations that the ANC-led government had sold out the cause of the Palestinians by not implementing the ANC’s decision to downgrade relations almost 10 months after the resolution was finalised. Mandla Mandela himself came out guns blazing, calling on the government to implement the downgrade resolution with immediate effect.
The whole fracas left me rather despondent and wanting wholeheartedly to believe in good faith that our government did in fact intend to implement the ANC’s decision. I put the question to the president in a press conference on his last night in New York.
The response was clear and categorical – the South African government was not having second thoughts on implementing the ANC’s resolution but that it was a process and it would certainly happen.
That was a clear undertaking by the president who has always shown sincere solidarity with the Palestinian cause, even during his days at the helm of Mvelaphanda. We can stop throwing mud at each other internally, and focus on the real struggle at hand.
South Africa will be on the right side of history, but it is only one small step on a long road. But, then again, it took small steps in the late 1980s to build momentum towards confining apartheid to the dustbin of history.
What we are doing is taking a principled stand, and hoping that the rest of the world will follow course.
Whether they do or not we have to continually ask ourselves, “What would Madiba have done?” TWO SEPARATE pieces of research published by the Networking HIV and AIDS Community of Southern Africa (Nacosa) highlight the need for services and screening for victims of gender-based violence as a critical part of the country’s HIV response.
A study by Nacosa in Wentworth, KwaZulu-Natal, looked at simultaneously screening people for HIV and gender-based violence (GBV) and found that almost half (45.7%) of the people screened had a history of past or present GBV and required support.
The study concluded that victims of GBV should be recognised as a key population for HIV testing in South Africa.
An evaluation of NGO services at Thuthuzela Care Centres (one-stop sexual violence centres based in state hospitals) found that these services had a profound impact on the lives of survivors and also supported survivors to take post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to prevent the transmission of HIV post-rape.
A large proportion of the South African population is unaware of the locations or the services provided at Thuthuzela Care Centres or are unable to access them as they are located far from the communities in which they live.
Critical to the effectiveness of the NGO services is that they are available 24 hours a day and are tailored to the immediate needs of rape survivors of all ages.
One survivor, Nombuso (not her real name), was escorted to a Thuthuzela Care Centre by the police. She was guided through the process by an NGO-trained and -appointed counsellor who also ensured she completed all her counselling sessions and attended two support groups.
Nombuso described the services she received, saying: “What I can tell you is that the counsellors here are very patient. They have love.”
The initiation of PEP is timesensitive, with the first dose of drugs needing to be administered within 72 hours of rape. This can particularly disadvantage children, who often only disclose sexual abuse some time after it has occurred.
Other delays found to affect access to PEP for adults and children include a lack of awareness of the time-bound nature of PEP initiation, the time spent taking statements from rape survivors, as well as long waits in casualty.
Communities may also not know that HIV infection can be prevented through the administration of PEP.
While considerable barriers to PEP follow-up and adherence were acknowledged, NGOs were reported to contribute to a number of facilitating factors, including offering adherence support and increasing motivation of survivors during follow-up phone calls and home visits, as part of the longer-term psychosocial support they are able to offer.
According to a nurse working in a TCC, “the services are excellent because they are doing a lot, counselling and giving them transport and doing home visits and in most of the cases they do the calls. They call them to come for the results. They even give us reports to say they were able to reach which people and which ones didn’t return and we work hand in glove with them nicely.”
Psychosocial support services provided by NGOs are funded by the Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria. However, this funding will come to an end in March 2019. A doctor working in a TCC interviewed for the research said: “If we do not have any NGO support, it means the psychosocial services are going to literally come to a standstill. There is going to be such a long waiting list for this one social worker. And she does not even specialise in children. So, the presence of the NGO here is of utmost importance. They really do a major part of the service.”