By Akol Vankar
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The United States has introduced its first-ever global health strategy, signaling a significant shift in its approach to international engagement. Focused on four main pillars, prioritizing national interests, building bilateral partnerships, emphasizing measurable outcomes, and leveraging U.S. innovation, this strategy departs from traditional multilateral frameworks. For Uganda, a country that has greatly benefited from long-standing U.S. health aid, including pioneering programs like PEPFAR and PMI, along with extensive USAID initiatives, the new approach presents both opportunities to strengthen cooperation and risks that demand a proactive policy response.
KEY SHIFTS IN THE U.S. APPROACH
- Bilateralism Over Multilateralism: The U.S. is shifting away from extensive participation in multilateral channels toward direct, country-tocountry collaboration.
- Result-Oriented Assistance: There is a rising demand for demonstrable outcomes and accountability in the use of American health funding.
- Alignment with U.S. interests: health assistance is now more clearly linked to American security, economic gains, and foreign policy goals.
IMPLICATIONS FOR UGANDA
Opportunities for Advancement
- Sustained Priority Funding: Diseases of strategic concern, like HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis, remain central to American global health priorities, ensuring ongoing resource support in these areas.
- Enhanced Negotiation Stance: Uganda’s strong health data systems and established infrastructure give it an advantage in bilateral talks, providing leverage to secure customized program agreements.
- Stimulus for Innovation: The renewed focus on American technology and innovation creates opportunities for Ugandan health entrepreneurs and public-private partnerships to access new funding sources and technical expertise.
Recognized Risks and Emerging Challenges
- Decreased Multilateral Coordination: As the U.S. lessens its involvement in global health governance institutions like the WHO, Uganda faces a risk of fragmented donor support, which could cause inefficiencies and duplication.
- Increased Conditionality: Future U.S. funding is likely to be increasingly contingent upon demonstrated governance reforms, transparency measures, and alignment with shared values, raising the bar for aid eligibility.
- Heightened Geopolitical Pressures: The changing landscape may compel Uganda to navigate complex diplomatic terrain, balancing U.S. priorities with those of other influential actors, such as China, in the health sphere.
STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UGANDA’S POLICYMAKERS
- National Policy Response
- Enhance Financial Transparency: Deploy internationally recognized costing tools and data frameworks such as those advanced by the Gates Open Research roadmap to produce robust, transparent health program budgets.
- Institutionalize Accountability: Incorporate performance metrics and thorough reporting systems into the Ministry of Health’s strategic plans and annual budgets to assure funders of Uganda’s dedication to results-driven management.
- Expand Funding Base: Pursue diversified financing by bolstering domestic resource mobilization and strengthening partnerships with regional and South-South actors, thereby reducing over-reliance on any single donor.
Diplomatic and Technical Engagement
- Align with U.S. priorities: Proactively position Uganda as a crucial partner in key areas of mutual concern, including pandemic preparedness, regional health security, and emerging infectious diseases.
- Showcase Impact: Consistently evaluate and share Uganda’s health achievements to reinforce the need for continuous and adaptable U.S. support, using evidence-based stories that emphasize accountability and return on investment.
Conclusion
The United States’ First Global Health Strategy does not signal a retreat from global health but instead signifies a shift toward a more transactional, interest-driven era. For Uganda, adaptive leadership and strategic policy actions are crucial. By aligning its health priorities, strengthening governance frameworks, and engaging more assertively with both traditional and new partners, Uganda can not only reduce risks but also unlock new opportunities. This approach will be crucial to protecting public health gains and maintaining resilience in a rapidly evolving global health environment.
Akol Vankar is Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) Student at the George Washington University, USA MS, Nutrition and Policy, Tufts University, USA
About Author
