Ghana Rejects $109 Million US Health Deal Over Data-Sharing Terms
Updated
Updated · bbc.co.uk · Jul 7
Ghana Rejects $109 Million US Health Deal Over Data-Sharing Terms
3 articles · Updated · bbc.co.uk · Jul 7
Summary
Ghana turned down a proposed $109 million US health agreement in April after its Data Protection Commission objected to the breadth of patient and pathogen data Washington wanted.
Arnold Kavaarpuo, the commission's executive director, said Ghana saw no adequate reciprocal safeguards and would lose control of sovereign data once it left the country.
That resistance reflects wider pushback to the Trump administration's new bilateral health MOUs, which ask countries to raise domestic spending while advancing US strategic and commercial interests, including priority for American drugmakers.
By mid-May, 32 countries had accepted the MOUs, but Zimbabwe and Zambia also balked over data access and economic conditions, underscoring patchy African support for the US shift away from WHO-led cooperation.
Is America's new health strategy a form of digital colonialism, trading aid for African genetic data?
With aid tied to critical minerals, must African nations choose between public health and national resources?
Can a strategy that dismantled frontline health services truly be considered a global health initiative?
$20 Billion at Stake: U.S.-Africa Health MOUs, Legal Battles, and the Struggle for Data Sovereignty (2025–2030)
Overview
The report explores the growing controversy over the U.S.-Africa health Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs), which began with a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy under the Trump administration. This new 'America First' global health strategy marks a radically different approach from past U.S. practices, aiming to reshape global health partnerships through dozens of bilateral deals across Africa. Kenya was the first to sign a five-year agreement, setting the stage for similar deals in other countries. The report highlights how these MOUs have sparked resistance, legal battles, and debates about policy independence, transparency, and the future of equitable health cooperation.