01914    a2200289   4500001001100000005001700011008003900028020001800067037003600085040000700121041000800128072001500136072001600151072001300167072001600180072002100196072002100217072002100238072002800259100003500287245008800322250000600410260003200416300001000448520115100458999001501609131712151120250317111614.0250312042016GB                   eng    a9781317121510  bTaylor & FranciscGBP 51.99fBB  a01  aeng7 aJPS2thema7 a1QFG2bisac7 aJPS2bic7 a1QFG2bisac7 aMED0220202bisac7 aPOL0000002bisac7 aPOL0340002bisac7 a362.1969792009682bisac1 aAnnamarie Bindenagel Šehovi?10aHIV/AIDS and the South African StatebSovereignty and the Responsibility to Respond  a1  aOxfordbRoutledgec20160422  a256 p  bFor three decades post-apartheid, the HIV/AIDS epidemic from first acknowledgement to its management as a chronic disease, demanded unparalleled attention. This was nowhere more evident than in South Africa. This book explores how the state responded to its responsibilities to defend and protect (human) security.  Linking this to the role of the state as sovereign protector and provider of security, it applies the findings to the broader re-interpretation of sovereign responsibility in the 21st Century. This book does not seek to absolve the South African state of its responsibility to respond. Moreover, it argues that although the state, the government, before, during, and after the transition to democracy, was aware of and acknowledged the threat - political, economic and social - posed by the epidemic, it nonetheless chose not to make the epidemic a priority policy issue. As a result, it argues that the South African HIV/AIDS case illustrates the tension inherent between a state’s ultimate sovereign responsibility to respond and its tactical dependence on external contributors to meet the demands of all of its constituents.  c5192d5192