THERE have always been controversies as to what constitutes a national security threat both at the conceptual and theoretical levels and at the level of concrete policies.

The way national interest is defined, by whom and how, which is the basis for national security threat analysis, and how the perceived national interest is under threat, has mainly been the source of controversies.

If readers are wondering where I am going with this, it would be instructive if they take a good look at how HIV infections in the public sector workforce could affect Guyana’s long-term prospects as a viable nation.  I am not convinced that enough seriousness informs the mind of a significant percentage of public servants and – I would make bold to say, that not enough involvement is evident in the informal economic and social sectors.  Yes, some efforts have been made by the Ministry of Health through its various programmes to address the healthy lifestyles education and training needs of public sector workers and the external clients of those involved ministries.
However, the thrust of this missive is that public servants have not done enough to educate themselves about what it would mean if the workforce is depleted through high infection rates.  In other words, the concept of national interest does not seem to occupy a place in their collective consciousness.  The focus probably should be on what is to be done in HIV prevention education to promote the prospects for a resolute national security posture on all fronts.

It is in the national interest in pursuance of political and socio-economic stability that our development sectors are firing on all cylinders.  Any event that undermines the proper functioning of the state, but more particularly any threat that has the potential for destabilization is a danger to national security.  The AIDS pandemic if not checked could impact morbidity and mortality in the public sector workforce.  Therefore, HIV must be seen for what it is – the potential precursor to underdevelopment and stagnation.  If we were to consider the possible loss of our human resources in the agriculture, housing, mining, and security sectors caused by AIDS-related deaths, then I am sure our appreciation for food producers, artisans, miners, policemen and soldiers and living healthy lifestyles would be greatly enhanced.
Plainly put, if we can no longer provide our own food, shelter and security (just to name a few) then we are likely to become vulnerable to the vicissitudes of a competitive and sometimes uncaring world.  It is in this regard that I would like to urge a rethink of our intervention strategies to focus more on people seeing themselves and what they do as important to the maintenance of our national interest and the preservation of national security.