Global Health Diplomacy in a Transactional Era
- FHS Communications, Nelson Aghogho Evaborhene
On January 20th 2025, President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and suspended foreign health aid
including crucial funding for health initiatives targeting HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria. Following widespread public backlash, this decision was reversed. However, a follow-up executive order led to freezing of aid to South Africa. These actions displayed a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy,-specifically a political shift from a humanitarian-based approach to a transactional approach.
Overview
Traditionally, global health diplomacy has been built on the foundations of collaboration, mutual benefit, and humanitarian objectives. In contrast, the Trump administration used global health funding as a means of conditioning aid based on political alignment. Consequently, South Africa was targeted which reflects the shift from prioritising global health needs and instead favouring national security interests through selective aid distribution.
Key Findings
South Africa has one of the highest burdens of HIV/AIDS. The suspension of funding for health initiatives targeting HIV/ADIS, tuberculosis, and malaria, undermines the collaborative nature of global health diplomacy. By politicising health aid, the U.S. risks disruption of collective health responses, diminished effectiveness of global health initiatives, and destabilising partnerships. Effective responses to global health threats require sustained cooperation and commitment to the greater good across nations. Prioritising public health over political agendas is essential to ensuring an effective response to 21st-century health challenges.
Original Article In: Lancet