Devex Newswire: Just how ‘global’ is Trump’s global health strategy?

The Trump administration’s new approach to global health focuses heavily on working with partner governments. But critics worry those governments won’t be working “with” the United States so much as working “for” it — while being forced to abandon the multilateral community to boot.

Also in today’s edition: We check in on COP30 — from the loans to the rivalries to the “love hotels.”

+ Upcoming event: The Innovation Foundation, the Adecco Group’s global foundation, is adopting a venture-studio approach instead of traditional grants for corporate philanthropy. A Devex Pro Briefing tomorrow will feature Cynthia Hansen, managing director of the Innovation Foundation, to discuss how this works and what it means for NGOs, social enterprises, and cofunders. Save your spot now.

Unhealthy relationship?

The Trump administration’s global health policies are a work in progress, but a template obtained by Devex that outlines how partner governments would enter into bilateral agreements with the United States sheds light on the ideas floating around the White House for how it will engage with other countries.

And that engagement includes locking them into decades-long pathogen-sharing agreements while circumventing global agreements, my colleague Sara Jerving writes.

“In our view, these bilateral agreements will undermine the multilateral system. They will bypass the WHO, and the foundations of solidarity and equity we have been trying to build here,” Dr. Michel Kazatchkine, a member of the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, said in a statement to a WHO working group on the pandemic treaty.

Fifa Rahman, principal consultant at Matahari Global Solutions, was less diplomatic, telling Sara the agreements would be “exploitative” and “neocolonial.”

They were both specifically referring to the requirement that countries send the U.S. data on pathogens found within their borders within five days, including genetic sequences. This would sideline the part of the global Pandemic Agreement known as pathogen access and benefit-sharing, or PABS, which is still under negotiation. PABS involves a push by low- and middle-income countries to ensure that when they share pathogen information, they benefit from the health countermeasures developed in response.

The U.S. template, however, doesn’t mention benefits but instills consequences: Failure to share the data could result in funding changes or discontinuation of the agreement.

The template also breaks down how funding responsibilities will shift from the U.S. to partner governments and ensures those governments commit to cofinance from their own budgets, as opposed to using funds from other donors or multilateral organizations.

And it dictates that partner countries accept the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s emergency-use authorization of medical countermeasures as sufficient for use in outbreaks. That’s not sitting well with critics either.

This is “highly concerning,” says K.M. Gopakumar, legal adviser for the Third World Network, adding that granting automatic acceptance for FDA-approved medical countermeasures, even without access to the full dossiers, “essentially turns these countries into experimental grounds for U.S. medical products.” 

Read: US template for bilateral health deals bypasses WHO pandemic negotiations

+ ICYMI, we’ve started a new series called The Future of Global Health. It explores the consequences of cuts to foreign aid and the efforts to find a new direction for global health. Catch up on our coverage.

Seeing the forest through the trees

If you read yesterday’s edition of the Newswire, you will have deduced that I’m a tad cynical when it comes to global confabs such as the current 30th U.N. Climate Change Conference, or COP30, producing actual money over nebulous pledges.

Though I still have my doubts that high-income countries will pony up the kind of money that lower-income countries are seeking at COP30, the gathering in Belém, Brazil, did generate an early, pleasant multibillion-dollar surprise — in the form of $5.5 billion in commitments from governments for the Tropical Forest Forever Facility.

The TFFF, which will be housed at the World Bank, is based on a financing model that aims to harness private investment from sovereign wealth funds — rather than traditional aid — to pay countries to protect their tropical forests, while turning a profit for those wealth funds.

Years in the making, the fund was first floated during the Copenhagen COP in 2009 by former World Bank Treasurer Kenneth Lay and later refined by Brazil.

“We were all very conscious of the deforestation issues,” Lay tells my colleague Jesse Chase-Lubitz. “It seems obvious that you have these tropical countries that are custodians of this global resource. But if you look at the short-term finances, it was a lot more profitable to cut the trees down than to keep them standing.”

So the plan is to flip that profit calculus in favor of preservation over deforestation.

Andrew Deutz of the World Wildlife Fund says the fund “represents everything that developed countries have been asking for in the climate finance debates: it is based on investments rather than foreign aid grants; the investor pool includes developing countries; it effectively leverages private investment; it has the full backing of the majority of the world's tropical forest countries; and the co-design process has been led by a developing country.”

Read: The untold origins of COP30’s flagship multibillion-dollar forest facility

For the love of COP

Jesse, who’s braving the Brazilian Amazon’s humidity and downpours for us along with our colleague Ayenat Mersie, writes that there seem to be more financial announcements in the first few days of COP30 than there were across all of COP29. They range from a $1 billion loan from the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank for Brazil to a World Bank-backed framework to help businesses invest responsibly in carbon markets.

Money for adaptation has been a big theme during the first two days of the two-week conference. On paper, that sounds like a sign it’s a priority. But the theme days for yesterday and today also encompass cities, infrastructure, water, waste, local governments, the bioeconomy, circular economy, science, tech, and artificial intelligence. So basically … everything, including the kitchen sink.

“Ten years after the Paris Agreement, we are still waiting for promises made to turn into delivery,” says Evans Njewa, chair of the LDC Group on Climate Change. “Belém must be the turning point.”

Jesse is also hearing speculation that COP31 will be hosted by Australia in 2026, potentially squashing an ongoing rift between Turkey and Australia about who will host the next climate summit. That would be good since Turkey and Australia sit side-by-side in the (unairconditioned) pavilion space. Hopefully, the heat doesn’t further inflame this COP rivalry.

Oh, and we’ve heard that Brazil was so desperate to find accommodation for COP attendees that the government asked “love hotels” to pause their, erm, regular programming for two weeks.

Read: COP30 reporters’ notebook — Day 1

+ Check out our focus page for all our COP30 coverage, including our special edition newsletters.

One big number

That’s how much the Global Environment Facility gave in total grants between 2021 and 2025, during which time it also approved 1,162 projects.

To date, GEF has provided over $26 billion and mobilized another $153 billion in cofinancing to support projects since its establishment in 1991.

Check out my colleague Miguel Antonio Tamonan’s latest analysis to learn how the GEF funds its projects, where it invests its money, and what its sectoral priorities are.

Read: What did the Global Environment Facility spend $6.4 billion on? (Pro)

+ Start your 15-day free trial of Devex Pro and instantly access our comprehensive suite of resources: expert analysis, insider briefings, an extensive funding database, and curated event listings. Discover all the exclusive content available to Pro members here.

Thirsty for knowledge

To address water scarcity, you need to have a clear picture of the problem. That’s where the first edition of the World Bank’s Global Water Monitoring Report titled “Continental Drying: A Threat to our Common Future” comes in, providing the most detailed assessment yet of the world’s fresh water.

“The newly available data and enhanced satellite images show us exactly where water is disappearing and offer a menu of solutions for areas threatened by the water crisis,” van Trotsenburg writes in an opinion piece for Devex.

“This isn’t just a water issue. It’s an economic and development challenge because safe water is foundational infrastructure critical for everyday life as well as job creation and economic growth,” he adds. “Governments, researchers, and communities now have the evidence they need to anticipate risk, design targeted responses, and plan for a drier, more variable future.” 

Opinion: World Bank outlines ways to secure fresh water for a livable planet

In other news

Intense fighting in central Sudan displaced some 2,000 people over the past three days, according to the International Organization for Migration, as clashes between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces deepened in the region. [AP]

A boat carrying Rohingya people fleeing Myanmar has capsized near the Thai-Malaysian maritime border, killing at least 11 people and leaving hundreds missing. [Al Jazeera]

India imposed stricter anti-pollution measures in New Delhi and adjoining areas on Tuesday, as air quality deteriorated to “severe” levels in the city. [Reuters]

All-knowing

To see how well you followed all the major global development affairs, take our monthly news quiz!

Sign up to Newswire for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development.