President Thabo Mbeki and Tony Leon have been writing to each other again, arguing over HIV/Aids. They found a lot else to disagree about. Their latest correspondence, 54 pages of it, much of it technical medical and legal argument, was tabled in Parliament on Thursday. We publish excerpts You may … be unaware of the desperate attempt made by some scientists in the past to blame HIV/Aids on Africans, even at the time when the United States was the epicentre of reported deaths from Aids. To me as an African, it is both interesting and disturbing that the signatories of the so- called “Durban Declaration” return to the thesis about the alleged original transmission of HIV from (African) animals to humans, given what science has said about Aids during the last two decades. I accept that it may be that you do not understand the significance of this and the message it communicates to Africans, hence your queer observation that I seek to silence our critics, without responding to their arguments. – Mbeki to Leon, July 17, on the document presidential representative Parks Mankahlana committed to the dustbin
By labelling your critics (even those who mildly disagree with government policy) as “racist” you cut your party off from new ideas. Since you could so easily dismiss your critics (both publicly and to yourself) you do not test your ideas against those of your opponents in reasoned and rational debate. It is far easier to dismiss a person as “racist” than to argue issues on the merits, or even acknow-ledge that your opponents just might be right, every now and then. As a result, the thinking of your party has stiffened into orthodoxy. – Leon to Mbeki, July 28
I would far rather, Mr President, that you and I should work together on this supreme crisis facing our country … I would be only too happy to stand on the same platform with you to back a campaign for the eradication of sexually transmitted diseases whose prevalence does so much to help spread HIV/Aids. I am not interested in whether my supporters or yours suffer more from STDs [sexually transmitted diseases] … We both want the best for our country and for all our countrymen and women. I will be only too happy to meet you at your earliest convenience to discuss how we may work together to dramatise that this is a crisis for all of us, that death and disease know no distinction of politics, creed or race. I believe that the sight of the president and leader of the opposition working together in such a way would have a very great public impact and would show just how serious we are and how great the crisis is. This in itself could save lives. I beg you, let us make that our sole priority. – Leon to Mbeki, July 28
I would like to encourage you that, indeed, you must campaign for the elimination of STDs, as well as all the other obstacles that obstruct our people’s efforts to rebuild their lives. There is no need, whatsoever, that you wait for the moment when the president and the leader of the official opposition can do this together, sharing the same platform. You state that the appearance of the president and the leader of the official opposition on the same stage, campaigning on the same health issue, would make “a very great public impact”. You may very well be correct. But I can also imagine how many people there would be, at home and abroad, who would ask a particular question. That question would be – why does the elected president not have sufficient courage to discharge his responsibilities about the health challenge we face, without requiring that the leader of the official opposition should hold his hand? – Mbeki to Leon, August 5
You are entirely wrong to claim, as in your July 28 letter, that “death and disease know no distinction of politics, creed or race”. Perhaps this illustrates graphically the point that we do, indeed, occupy different planets. Contrary to what you say, even a child, from among the black communities, knows that our own “burden of disease” coincides with the racial divisions in our country. – Mbeki to Leon, August 5
I do not think that politicians are under any “moral obligation” (in fact quite the opposite) to claim the right to deliver final judgement on questions of scientific fact. It is a totalitarian principle that political leadership is somehow on a higher plane to technical expertise and is thus entitled to override the autonomy of all institutions in society. – Leon to Mbeki, July 28, urging that Mbeki follow mainstream scientific advice on the best way to combat HIV/Aids
Let me assure you that as long as I have to occupy a decision-making position … so long will I take such decisions as may be necessary and morally defensible, whatever institution makes recommendations according to its mandate and possibilities. The idea that, as the exe-cutive, we should take decisions we can defend, simply because views have been expressed by scientist-economists, scientist-agriculturists, scientist- environmentalists, scientists- pedagogues, scientist-soldiers, scientist-health workers, scientist-communicators etc, is absurd in the extreme. It is sad that you feel compelled to sink to such absurdity, simply to promote the sale of AZT. – Mbeki to Leon, August 5
I have always treated you, and your office, with the courtesy and the decorum your position and you personally are entitled to expect. However, I believe that as elected head of state you have treated me, as elected leader of the opposition, with basic discourtesy since June 1999 … Your immediate predecessor chose the path of consultation … [Y]ou might wish to reflect on the fact that you have never once issued an invitation to the opposition to discuss matters of common concern to the country. It is only when the opposition has sought a meeting with government that same has been acceded to. – Leon to Mbeki, July 28
The broad issue you raise about how the pre- sident of the republic and the leader of the official opposition should relate to each other is completely irrelevant to the matter we have been discussing. – Mbeki to Leon, August 5
I think you have made your point about your importance when, in the National Assembly, to depart from the physical position occupied by FW de Klerk, the first democratically elected leader of the official opposition, you moved from the bench opposite the deputy president’s to the bench opposite the president’s bench. As for the rest, I wish you success as the leader of the official opposition. – Mbeki to Leon, August 5, objecting to where Leon is seated in Parliament
I do not believe that the dialogue in which we have been engaged is of any help in helping the people of our country to understand the truth about what we have been discussing. – Mbeki to Leon, August 5 On AZT and Virodene you have taken the following contradictory positions: AZT is a “toxic danger to the public health” but Virodene is a “mercy treatment”. Aids sufferers are “morally entitled” to Virodene but doctors should not be allowed to prescribe AZT to rape survivors; Glaxo Wellcome is driven solely by a concern “to increase the sales of AZT” but the owners of Virodene were seeking “good for all humanity”; and arguing for off-label use of AZT is a “violation of the law”, but the refusal by the Medicines Control Council to allow Virodene to be tested on Aids sufferers are the “cruel games of those who do not care”. – Leon to Mbeki, August 24, comparing Mbeki’s statements on AZT with those on the bogus South African anti-Aids drug Virodene, which was based on an industrial solvent
Thank you for your letter dated 24 August 2000. As I indicated in my last letter, it is perhaps best that we close this written exchange of views. – Mbeki to Leon, September 1
You dismiss Charlene Smith’s defence of herself in the Mail & Guardian and once again re-quote her as saying in The Washington Post (June 4): “Here [in South Africa], [Aids] is spread primarily by heterosexual sex – spurred by men’s attitudes towards women. We won’t end this epidemic until we understand the role of tradition and religion – and of a culture in which rape is endemic and has become a prime means of transmitting the disease to young women as well as children.” You claim that his is a “nakedly racist statement”. Yet nowhere in this quote does Charlene Smith make a racial distinction between black, coloured, Indian or white South Africans. You are reading into the statement a racial intention that is by no means evident. – Leon to Mbeki, July 28
All rape is reprehensible. I was as distressed when I heard about Ms Smith’s rape as happens whenever I hear of any incidence of rape. Accordingly and unreservedly, I sympathise with her. In Ms Smith’s case, I immediately spoke to the then minister of safety and security to take all necessary measures to ensure that the culprit was apprehended and charged. The minister kept me informed about this matter constantly, relating even to the means the [South African Police Service] used to identify the culprit. I know that none of this could ever undo the grave harm and damage done to Ms Smith. Over this specific incident I have no influence. I, like other people, did what I had the power to do. I have not sought to vilify Ms Smith. But neither do I accept that her terrible and unacceptable ordeal gives her licence to propagate racism, as I am convinced her published Washington Post comments do. – Mbeki to Leon, August 5