The United Nations Security Council has adopted a resolution calling for education and condom-distribution programs to reduce HIV infection rates among UN peacekeeping troops. Although the resolution addresses a relatively tiny segment of the worldwide AIDS pandemic, it represents a major symbolic step for the security council, which had never before made a disease the focus of a resolution. The move comes on the heels of a White House announcement classifying AIDS as a threat to US national security (Nature Med 6, 117, 2000), a move expected to draw increased attention—and funding—to research on the disease.The resolution was initiated by Richard Holbrooke, US ambassador to the United Nations, who began to express concern about AIDS among peacekeeping troops in 1992. The issue remained dormant until Holbrooke visited Africa late last year. Mary Ellen Glynn, a staffer who accompanied the ambassador on that trip, says that “the rates of [HIV] infection were much higher for UN peacekeepers than for the general population.” The troops appear to contract the disease primarily from local prostitutes in the areas where they are stationed.

Although the final version of the resolution was adopted unanimously, there were signs of dissent. Diplomats from countries that contribute troops for peacekeeping reportedly complained that the US, which does not have UN combat troops, was imposing conditions on other nations' citizens. Yusef Juwayeyi, Malawi's ambassador to the UN, reportedly objected to the resolution's statement that the epidemic was “exacerbated by conditions of violence and instability.” Malawi is not a war zone, but the prevalence of HIV in the country's military personnel now approaches 50%, one of the highest infection rates in Africa. The original resolution also contained a line which would have kept AIDS on the council's agenda for future meetings, but this was deleted by Russia and will not be discussed again by the council until the complex process of putting it back on the agenda is achieved.

To many public health experts and researchers, it might seem intuitive to increase the emphasis on malaria and tuberculosis control as well as AIDS control, so it would make scientific sense to classify these diseases as security issues also. Neal Nathanson, former director of the NIH Office of AIDS Research agrees with that assessment in principle, but points out that the skyrocketing trend in AIDS appears to have driven the new perception among policymakers and argues against trying to classify other diseases the same way. “If you keep extrapolating the AIDS situation you're really talking about something which is truly astronomical in its consequences, which could cause total social collapse, and I don't think that's true with malaria and TB,” Nathanson told Nature Medicine, adding, “I think you lose credibility if you get too strident and try to put everything into the same category.”