We must not retreat from the world's fight against AIDS
3 min read
The UK is moving in the wrong direction. Now, more than ever, we must defend international cooperation and multilateralism.
Two decades ago, the world faced a crisis. AIDS was decimating communities across sub-Saharan Africa. Healthcare systems in the poorest countries were overwhelmed. Born from that crisis, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was a bold experiment in international cooperation that has delivered extraordinary results. Since 2002, it has saved 70m lives and strengthened health systems worldwide.
As minister for Africa, I saw the impact first-hand. I met mothers who protected their unborn children from HIV thanks to antiretroviral drugs provided through the support of the Global Fund. These were not abstract statistics. They were healthy babies. The question now is whether we have the will to see this through.
This month, world leaders will gather in Johannesburg for the Global Fund’s eighth replenishment. Germany has pledged €1bn. As co-hosts with South Africa, the world will be watching Britain. We face a choice: maintain our commitment or retreat from one of the world’s greatest health achievements.
The cost of retreat would be devastating. A 20 per cent cut to Britain’s pledge would result in nearly six million preventable infections, putting the most vulnerable — especially children — at serious risk. Such a move would not only be a moral failure but a strategic one.
We are living in an age when the international rules-based order faces unprecedented strain. China operates beyond global norms. American isolationism grows. The US has withdrawn entirely from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, with its health secretary casting doubt on vaccine science itself. American leadership, once assured, can no longer be assumed.
And Britain? Earlier this year, we slashed funding for Gavi by 20 per cent. We are moving in the wrong direction, precisely when we must defend international cooperation and multilateralism most vigorously.
The Global Fund represents multilateralism at its best: nations working together to solve problems no single country can tackle alone. By pooling government and private sector resources, the Global Fund delivers more bang for our collective buck. This is investment that we can be proud of: transparent, efficient, and profoundly effective.
The AIDS crisis taught us that diseases do not respect borders. COVID-19 reminded us of this with devastating clarity. Our struggle to tackle domestic HIV cases and rising TB infections is a stark reminder that these are not merely ‘overseas problems’. Disease can resurge anywhere when global prevention falters. The Global Fund acts as insurance for Britain's health. Prevention is always cheaper and less painful than cure.
But this is about more than health. Tackling disease in the poorest countries alleviates the conditions that fuel instability, displacement and conflict. As former chief of defence staff Lord Richards recently argued, international development and defence are "two sides of the same coin." Healthy communities that can learn, work and thrive create resilient societies. By investing in global health, we help to build the stable world our national security depends on.
Two-thirds of the British public believe we should maintain or increase Global Fund funding, a recent More in Common poll found. They recognise, as I do, that spending on global health isn't a binary choice between generosity and self-interest. Protecting health, abroad and at home, is essential to our national strength, not an alternative to it.
In the time taken to read this, the Global Fund has saved another 25 lives. Britain helped create something remarkable, proof of what the world can achieve when it acts together. As leaders gather this November, we face a choice: stand firm or retreat.
The stakes couldn't be higher. For global health, for Britain's role in the world, and for our own security.
Gareth Thomas is Labour MP for Harrow West and a former development minister for Africa.
