US Unveils New Global Health Strategy After Cutting Billions in Aid

After President Trump’s administration pulled billions of dollars that were meant to go towards aid programs across the world, the White House announced on September 18 a new global health strategy, which will prioritize frontline supplies, staff, and direct relations with countries. In addition, this plan requires that countries on the receiving end of the aid co-invest toward goals centered around several diseases like HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and focuses more on transitioning from aid to self-reliance over the next few years. It also outlines that they will be doing this through bilateral deals with governments and specific faith-based organizations.
The newly named “America First Global Health Strategy” was designed to restructure the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Countries that were previously negatively affected by the aid cuts will receive $1.3 billion under the new strategy, and $827 million will go toward salaries and benefits for health workers. However, it doesn’t mention some areas that have been covered under previous plans, such as maternal health, cholera, and measles. The new strategy also favors bilateral deals instead of multilateralism, stating that the US plans to engage intensively with recipient country governments and hopes to start implementing these agreements by April 2026. Although the bilateral agreements are heavily emphasized, most of the 71 countries supported by the US will eventually be transitioning to full self-reliance under the terms of the plan, imposing a sharp limitation on the boundaries of aid.
The plan also has other important aspects. It acknowledges that American aid can be used as political leverage, specifically against China and its role in African economies. It states that, contrary to China’s model based on extracting debt from African nations, the US says it will build its agreements solely on achieving self-reliance in national health systems. In addition, the plan also emphasizes that it wants the global health programs to use products and diagnostic tests made in the U.S. The government will continue to make buying American products a key part of the program, and lastly, it will open up the possibility of investing more money than ever into healthcare in the Western Hemisphere.
The strategy has its shortfalls, one being the aforementioned lack of mention of preventable and treatable diseases that still ravage some parts of the world. Another is that the strategy never mentions South Africa, which is known as the epicenter of the global HIV epidemic. In other words, there is a sense that the US may end up favoring the areas that are convenient geopolitically and align with their values instead of the places where AIDS treatment is most critical. Still, the international reaction is largely positive as the United Nations backed the plan for its standard-raising regarding HIV and emphasis on vital mutual international agreements.