Times Of Swaziland: TRUMP CARD: A TEST FOR ESWATINI

TRUMP CARD: A TEST FOR ESWATINI
================================================================================
Alex Nxumalo on 02/02/2025 09:16:00


Foreign governments face an acid test and a wake-up call as newly-inaugurated
American President Donald Trump plays his trump card...
Trump’s alarming and unexpected freeze on foreign aid appears to serve as a
strategic advantage (or trump card) for his ‘America First’ policy. His
‘America First’ policy emerged as a crucial principle during his initial
term, shaping his perspective on both domestic and international matters. This
phrase resonated deeply with his supporters, symbolising a commitment to
prioritising American interests in trade, immigration and foreign relations.
At its core, the ‘America First’ policy underscores that the needs and
welfare of American citizens must be the foremost concern in government
decisions. It reflects the notion that the United States should concentrate on
enhancing its own economic health, security and sovereignty; however, it often
side-lines broader international issues.
This strategy marks a substantial shift from the conventional US foreign policy,
which has typically leaned toward multilateral agreements and global
cooperation.
Now, President of the United States - Donald Trump - a few days into his second
stint as president issued a rather astonishing proclamation; he mandated a
90-day suspension of foreign development aid. This order necessitates, in the
intervening period, comprehensive evaluations of existing initiatives.
However, the implications of such a decision are multifaceted and warrant
further scrutiny, for it raises questions about the long-term impact on global
relations. Although some may argue that this action is justified, it is crucial
to consider the potential consequences for those dependent on such aid; thus, a
careful analysis is essential.
Foreign
More importantly - specifically for African governments - the suspension of
American foreign aid prompts (or should prompt) important self-reflection or
introspection for many foreign governments, including the Kingdom of Eswatini.
This directive, while perhaps intended to recalibrate foreign aid strategies, is
undoubtedly detrimental - particularly for governments such as ours, who have
consistently struggled (deliberately or otherwise) to achieve self-sufficiency.
These governments, with many of their leaders pursuing, extravagant initiatives
(instead of self-sufficiency and development) have regrettably neglected to
prioritise sustainable development, thus becoming excessively dependent on
foreign aid, even in situations that may not warrant it.
I regret to say, many African governments have this perplexing habit of becoming
over reliant on aid, even when it is unnecessary. Their countries have abundant
natural resources which if utilised appropriately, could enable such countries
develop and be self-reliant rather than being perpetual beggars. The interaction
of a number of countries in Africa and aid in general – especially from the US
– has been at times, controversial; exposing challenging issues of governance,
responsibility and social equity.
Let us not beat about the bush: Pretending that some of these governments
possess the interests of developing their nations at heart, or that they
practice democratic principles, including looking after their own citizens’
welfare, is a mere fallacy. Many of them including our own kingdom rarely or do
not care at all about the above.Leaders of some of these countries on the one
hand, hoard their countries’ wealth for personal gain; some are corrupt and
often exhibit authoritarian tendencies against their people, crushing any
dissent.
Conversely, these governments frequently exhibit double standards: they squander
and mismanage the resources of their nations, while simultaneously pleading for
aid (cap in hand) from countries such as America. On the other hand, this
simultaneously obstructs what aid is meant to be, for it raises serious
questions with regard to agent and accountabilities.
For example, many countries try their best to make advancement, but once again,
people from such countries have reasons to be doubtful, thus creating this
enabling environment that is filled with contradictions. With the panic that
seems to encompass both foreign government leaders and their governments as well
as ordinary citizens who rely on aid, one cannot help but pose the question:
What are some of the implications of Trump’s freeze on foreign aid, especially
in areas such as HIV and Aids medication funding for sub-Saharan African
governments?
The ramifications of the cuts of foreign aid over the past years (more so on
healthcare cuts) have raised eyebrows over the years, particularly after major
policy shifts such as the foreign aid freeze instituted by Trump. Such cuts (and
freezes) have dire consequences, particularly for the developing nations like
Eswatini grappling with deadly health issues such as HIV/AIDS.
Our country – a tiny kingdom located in the Southern tip of the African
continent – ranked among the top countries in the world with the highest HIV
prevalence of around 27 per cent (I stand to be corrected) among adults. The
international aid, more specifically, from the United States, has been a
lifeline helping millions of people infected with the virus live longer and
productive lives.
Funding freezes directly impact the availability of medications. American aid
under the  US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has made
funding available to sub Saharan Africa and it has managed to save millions by
providing important antiretroviral treatment.
Stagnation of spending, or any related actions, can prompt further interrupts in
care for patients with HIV, more so raising the risks of disease mortality and
progression. Economic stability is of utmost priority and must be achieved, to
aid in guaranteeing aid and other treatments for the infected by ensuring that
viral suppression is achievable with much improved life quality.Nonetheless, the
reality of these shifts in funding levels is the exact opposite of gross
negligence. Such an attitude has the potential of ruining all the achievements
made in combating the HIV and AIDS epidemic.
Levels
This is a difficult position to find oneself in, but a situation like this can
be salvaged if aid and other service levels are maintained. Concerns arise,
however, the freeze has the potential to slow down prevention activities that
are very central to tackling the epidemic. These projects that try to promote
positive behavioural change such as discussing safe sex, regular seeking medical
attention and taking their medicine are mostly funded by external aids.
But if these projects are affected, new infections will rise and many people
will continue to ignore the means available to prevent new HIV infections which
puts in jeopardy the gains made by previous foreign aid support over the years.
Also, do not forget the socio-economic issue involved. The high prevalence of
HIV and AIDS deepens poverty and damages the human capital in our country and
others. With the already depleted health resources, the cut (or freeze) of
funding impacts not only the treatment, but expands to the entire public health
system.
This problem is worsened by the burden of other diseases like tuberculosis,
which usually comes with HIV infection.
The health resource diversion due to the freeze will most likely increase
morbidity and mortality rates of health indicators across the board because it
interrupts important activities. What about the job losses that will inevitably
follow the end of aid?
This raises significant concerns among communities that are already vulnerable.
The situation is especially troubling in regions like our country and others in
similar circumstances, where a large part of the population depends on jobs
created or maintained by projects reliant on foreign assistance.ith the
potential termination of these aid programmes, the risk of increased
unemployment becomes more likely.
This potential spike in joblessness could trigger a series of negative outcomes,
such as social unrest and a widening of existing inequalities. Many families,
particularly in our Eswatini Kingdom, are already finding it hard to make ends
meet; without the financial support that foreign funding has traditionally
provided, they could find themselves in an even more difficult situation.
The consequences of these job losses could be extensive, impacting not just
individuals but entire communities, as job loss significantly reduces people’s
ability to contribute to the economy. While some might suggest that alternative
solutions are available, the truth is that these measures often fall short of
addressing the magnitude of the issue.
Job loss not only jeopardises individual livelihoods but also threatens the
economic stability of entire communities.
Unemployment is prevalent not just in this country, but also in neighbouring
nations. With fewer job opportunities, many individuals may resort to crime or
seek informal and unstable work, which typically lacks the protections and
benefits associated with formal employment.
As job losses resulting in unemployment escalate, frustration mounts; the
potential for social unrest grows - because individuals and families may feel
compelled to take aggressive actions in response to their deteriorating
circumstances. However, this situation is complex and addressing these
challenges requires multifaceted approaches. Although many people recognise the
problems, solutions are often elusive.
In addition to immediate economic implications, cessation of aid could also
hinder long-term development efforts. It cannot be denied that many projects
funded by foreign assistance are designed to build capacity, improve
infrastructure and foster sustainable growth. Without these initiatives,
progress may likely stall; leaving communities vulnerable to future crises and
unable to adapt to changing economic conditions.
Although aid is crucial, it can also create dependencies that undermine local
initiatives. Therein lies the rub. We are too dependent on foreign aid such that
we fail or are lazy to think outside the box; devise ways and strategies that
will develop our country, stopping us from being perpetual beggars. Because of
these dependencies, the challenge becomes not just about the absence of aid,
rather about how communities can thrive independently.
Our kingdom (which gained independence over 50 years ago) has, however, not made
substantial progress; to be brutally honest, the strides we’ve made (or lack
thereof) all these decades are not something to write home about. We must engage
in honest reflection (this is crucial) and cease overly relying on foreign aid.
Resources
Instead, we should utilise the abundant natural resources at our disposal to
develop the country and foster self-reliance. It is excruciating to observe the
status quo already enjoying First World status, while the grassroots scavenge
for a living. Although significant potential exists, the disparity remains
stark.
In conclusion, President Trump’s suspension of aid serves as more than merely
a political manoeuvre; it is a wake-up call for African governments (and their
leaders). It is time to confront systemic issues surrounding governance,
transparency and accountability. The path forward requires a commitment to
serving citizens - not greedy, personal enrichment - and a visionary approach to
leadership that prioritises development and social equity over personal
enrichment.
Only through authentic reform can these nations achieve true independence and
restore the confidence of both their citizens and global allies. Nevertheless,
this scenario presents considerable obstacles, as leaders must manoeuvre through
the intricacies of implementing reform. While the journey may be challenging,
the opportunity for meaningful transformation persists.
Regardless of personal opinions, Trump has undeniably disrupted the complacency
and corruption prevalent in numerous governments. Kubo, bathathe Trump,
ntsanga’yetfu!
Peace! Shalom! Have a great weekend.
Alex Nxumalo 7605 8449
(Note: Developments after this article was written: According to a CNN online
publication dated January 29, 2025, “On Tuesday, Marco Rubio (Secretary of
State) issued a temporary waiver for existing ‘life-saving humanitarian
assistance’ programmes, to include ‘core life-saving medicine, medical
services, food, shelter, and subsistence assistance, as well as supplies and
reasonable administrative costs’.