The comments by Zambia’s foreign affairs minister, Mulambo Haimbe, on Monday brought into the open simmering tensions over President Donald Trump’s “America First” strategy, which is reshaping aid to Africa into transactional agreements.
Some African leaders and health experts have criticized the new U.S. stance and its demands for sensitive health data in exchange for badly needed support for health systems strained by the Trump administration's dismantling of foreign aid. Some say they would not receive access to health innovations like vaccines in return.
The U.S. is also seeking to challenge China, a dominant player in Zambia and much of Africa, whose minerals are critical to the green energy transition, including inputs for solar panels, electric vehicle batteries and energy storage systems.
In a statement, Haimbe described the accusations of Zambian graft and negotiation inertia by outgoing U.S. ambassador Michael Gonzales as “mischievous” and “deeply regrettable, undiplomatic and inconsistent with the spirit of mutual respect.”
Haimbe also accused the U.S. of tying access to critical minerals to the conclusion of the health deal, which Gonzales earlier dismissed as “alarmist allegations” that he called “disgusting” and “absolutely and patently false.”
Negotiations have continued for months to conclude the deal, one of dozens the Trump administration is pursuing in some of the world's most aid-dependent countries.
Gonzales in late April said Zambian leaders had “abdicated their responsibilities, letting the United States pay for healthcare while officials diverted government funds to their own pockets.” He said Zambian authorities had “ignored” U.S. overtures to conclude a new deal.
But Haimbe said negotiations had stalled over “unacceptable” data-sharing demands “in violation of our citizens’ right to privacy” and “the insistence on preferential treatment of U.S companies over Zambia’s critical minerals.”
Zambia "takes the view, first and foremost, that Zambians must have a say on how her critical minerals are used, and second that no one strategic partner is to be treated preferentially to others,” he said.
The U.S. Embassy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The U.S. approach replaces decades of engagement anchored in the now-dismantled United States Agency for International Development and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR.
In their place, U.S. officials are negotiating country-by-country agreements that recast aid as a transaction, tying funding to conditions to U.S. benefits.
Since late last year, the U.S has signed agreements with about 30 countries, many in Africa. Washington says the approach is meant to reduce donor dependency, promote local ownership and safeguard American interests, including against an aggressive China that dominates trade in Africa but contributes less aid.
