Zimbabwe has rejected a US health deal
Zimbabwe has rejected a US health deal that would have provided $367m (£272m) in funding over five years because of Washington’s demand for sensitive data.
The decision has come to light after a government memo from December was leaked, revealing that President Emmerson Mnangagwa felt the deal was “lopsided”.
A government spokesman has since explained the US was demanding access to biological samples for research and commercial gain but said it was not willing to share the benefits for future vaccines and treatments.
“We will now turn to the difficult and regrettable task of winding down our health assistance in Zimbabwe,” US ambassador to Zimbabwe Pamela Tremont said in a statement.
Her embassy said the US had provided more than $1.9bn in health funding to Zimbabwe over the last two decades.
A doctors’ association in Zimbabwe has called for further dialogue to find a deal acceptable to both sides so the country’s HIV programme can continue.
In December, Kenya’s High Court suspended a similar health funding agreement the government had signed with the US after a consumer rights lobby filed a case citing concerns about the safety of Kenyans’ health data.
Since returning to office last year, US President Donald Trump has slashed foreign aid and closed the US Agency for International Development (USAID).
The agency had administered aid for the US government, but Trump argued its spending was “wasteful” and his administration was pursing government-to-government deals to boost transparency and accountability.
According to the US embassy in Zimbabwe, 16 African countries have so far signed health pacts representing more than $18.3bn in new funding.
It said the money for Zimbabwe would have gone towards “HIV/Aids treatment and prevention, tuberculosis, malaria, maternal and child health, and disease outbreak preparedness”.
“We believe this collaboration would have delivered extraordinary benefits for Zimbabwean communities especially the 1.2 million men, women and children currently receiving HIV treatment through US-supported programmes,” Tremont said.
But government spokesperson Nick Mangwana said the arrangement was “asymmetrical”.
“Zimbabwe was being asked to share its biological resources and data over an extended period, with no corresponding guarantee of access to any medical innovations – such as vaccines, diagnostics, or treatments – that might result from that shared data,” his statement said.
“In essence, our nation would provide the raw materials for scientific discovery without any assurance that the end products would be accessible to our people should a future health crisis emerge.”
He also said the US’s withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) and its pursuit of bilateral health agreements were upending structures already set up through the global health agency.
Mangwana gave as an example its Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing scheme to deal with future pandemics.
“This system is designed to ensure that when a country contributes its data, the benefits – including vaccines and treatments – are shared equitably, not commercialised exclusively by those with the resources to develop them.”
Zimbabwe’s reservations over the US deal “should not be misconstrued as anti-American sentiment”, he added.
“We welcome continued dialogue with our American counterparts on how future co-operation might be structured in a manner that respects the sovereignty and dignity of both nations.”
The Zimbabwe College of Public Health Physicians (ZCPHP) said it understood the government’s concerns, but suggested negotiations should continue given that much of the country’s HIV programmes relied on external financing.
“Where technical issues exist, including those relating to data governance or implementation frameworks, these can often be addressed through technical clarification and negotiated safeguards,” it said.
