The introduction of the “America First” strategy in Burundi has not received much attention in Burundian media. Even media in exile, which are less concerned by Burundian authorities’ control and therefore freer to express themselves, did not raise questions around the recently signed bilateral health cooperation MoU between the US and the government of Burundi. Could this mean that the deal is perceived as not problematic, or even fully beneficial to Burundi, and could it therefore represent a topic that brings Burundians together?
It is hard to find a topic that does not become immediately politicised and divisive in Burundi, more than in other countries. However, the approval of the “America First” strategy, through the signing of the MoU last February 6th, did not seem to receive this treatment in Burundian media, despite it being an important political act of national and international concern.
The MoU foresees more than $129 million funding from the USA to Burundi, to support the country’s fight against HIV/AIDS and malaria, disease surveillance and outbreak response. On its side, the Government of Burundi has committed to increasing its own domestic health expenditures by $26 million over the next five years.
$26 million, even if spread over five years, seems to be a considerable amount for a country that allocated $91,7 million in total to its own health sector in 2024/2025 (UNICEF figures) and continues to receive important financial support from international donors: for instance, $16 million from WHO in 2024/2025, at least $22 million from the Pandemic Fund in 2025, and according to Burundi’s Ministry of Health, more than $112 million from the Global Fund for the 2026-2028 replenishment. On the other hand, it seems an almost negligeable amount if compared to the $610 million that the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Hydraulics, Energy and Mines seemed to announce for the WASH sector in the next five years, without specifying where such important amount would come from.
It’s not just about the money, though. Burundi has also been required to provide the USA with health data and information, which has been considered as ‘biomedical imperialism’ elsewhere.
In Burundian media*, I have only found one article that points out the (potentially) problematic aspects of the America First strategy (Yaga, 30 March) and three tweets announcing the signing of the agreement (Jimbere, 7 February and 9 February; Akeza, 9 February), besides those of the Ministry of Health (28 January, 6 February).
This seems to suggest that the country’s solvency capacity or the protection of Burundians’ health data and information, only indirectly evoked in Yaga’s analysis, do not seem to be topics of major concern in Burundian media.
Burundi’s peculiar information environment
One needs to consider that in Burundi, today, journalists do not easily take the initiative to analyse or question the government’s work. Press freedom in the country is still heavily affected by the consequences of the attempted coup d’état in May 2015, the attacks on and destruction of five main private radios, and the flight of several journalists, activists and political opponents, who are still in exile today. Political authorities often use their power to control the work of the journalists, who consequently respond with self-censorship. The lack of information on the “America First” MoU, therefore, could be determined by such an environment.
If this was the reason for the absence of discussion, however, I would have expected media in exile to speak out about this agreement, as they are not subject to Burundian authorities’ control and usually do not miss a chance to criticise the government on what is not going well in Burundi. Instead, they did not talk about it at all.
How to explain this?
Does this mean that the funding of Burundi’s health system, and therefore, Burundians’ health, are not so important topics for Burundian media?
Does this mean that the payment of $26 million by Burundi is not perceived as problematic? Is it because no severe consequences are expected if the pledge is not fulfilled?
Or does this mean that getting international funding is considered as a good thing anyway, regardless of the conditionalities it comes with, because it would help Burundi’s health system and therefore, Burundi’s population? (And in this case, Burundian media in exile may not want to give credit to the government for concluding a “good” deal?)
In this case, “America first” indeed seems to bring Burundians together – as long as the attention is focused on the money received and the other conditions of the deal remain ignored.
* I have consulted websites and tweets of the most followed and relevant media and information channels: Akeza, Bonesha, Burundi Eco, Inzamba, Iris News, Isanganiro, Iwacu, Jimbere, RPA, RTNB, Télé Renaissance, Yaga, as well as the Ministry of Health’s tweets. I didn’t take into consideration posts in Kirundi and radio/TV broadcasts. Inzamba, RPA, and Télé Renaissance are media in exile.