PEPFAR is a Foreign Aid program launched by President George Bush in 2003 to address the AIDS epidemics in several developing countries. It is almost universally acclaimed as one of the most successful foreign aid programs in history, saving around 25 million lives. Apart from lives saved, the program has been useful for controlling the epidemics.
The current US administration has stopped most of its foreign aid programs until an audit is carried on, and while I sincerely wish that after the review PEPFAR will be kept in the US Aid portfolio, there a significant chance that the US now considers itself overburdened by its long commitment to the provision of Global Public Goods. This is an extraordinary opportunity for the European Union to step in and fund the program either completely or in its near vicinity (Africa, Ukraine and Central America are natural regions for the EU intervention). Being an American ally, the European commission can ask the US to provide all information to complete a smooth transition (other partners, as Japan or Corea can perhaps commit to replace the US in their natural areas of influence). Given the urgency of the task, in my view the EU shall begin its preparation even before the US completes its review.
By its multilateral nature, the European Union cannot act in the world with the freedom of manoeuvre that a single national government can. On the other hand, foreign aid is less controversial than other influence tools, and the European Union shall compensate for its weaknesses by an intelligent use of its limited resources. By the friendly substitution of a close ally in a well-tested and effective Aid program, Europe can both enhance its internal cohesion and signal its external stance in the difficult period ahead.
I propose to all interested groups and persons to contact the President of the European Commission to ask her for the necessary arrangements to prepare for the eventuality of replacing the United States in the PEPFAR program. For your convenience, I provide the letter I have written to the President, while I suppose others will prefer to produce their own text.
-----------------
Dear President von der Leyen,
I am writing to bring to your attention the pressing matter of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a Foreign Aid initiative launched by President George W. Bush in 2003 to combat the AIDS epidemic in several developing countries. PEPFAR has been nearly universally acclaimed as one of the most successful Foreign Aid programs in history, having saved approximately 25 million lives and proving instrumental in controlling the epidemic.
Unfortunately, the current US administration has suspended most of its Foreign Aid programs pending a comprehensive audit. While I fervently hope that PEPFAR will remain a cornerstone of the US Aid portfolio post-review, there is a significant possibility that the US may now deem its commitment to PEPFAR as overly burdensome.
This scenario presents an extraordinary opportunity for the European Union to step in and assume funding of the PEPFAR program, either in its entirety or in specific regions (Africa, Ukraine and Central America look like natural priorities for Europe). As a close ally, the European Commission can request the United States government to provide all necessary information and support to facilitate a smooth transition.
Given the urgency of the situation, I believe it is prudent for the European Union to begin preparations even before the United States completes its review. By amicably substituting a close ally in a well-tested and effective aid program, Europe can not only enhance its internal cohesion but also signal its external stance in the challenging period ahead.
Thank you for considering this vital matter.
I really like the ambition here!
Some numbers to add context:
1. The previous U.S. administration requested $6.1 billion of funding for PEPFAR for FY 2025[1]. That's the equivalent of €5.856 billion[2].
2. 449.2 million people live in the European Union[3]. That is significantly more than the United States population.
3. The cost of funding PEPFAR would be €13.04 per year per EU resident. That's only slightly more than €1 per month.
https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/fact-sheet/the-u-s-presidents-emergency-plan-for-aids-relief-pepfar/
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/policy_and_exchange_rates/euro_reference_exchange_rates/html/eurofxref-graph-usd.en.html
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Population_and_population_change_statistics
It is worth noting that the European Union itself does not have that many financial resources: the EU's 2025 budget is ~€200 billion [1]. That is an order of magnitude less than the U.S. federal government budget. This means that the EU member states would need to provide funding for this program from their national budgets.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-annual-budget/2025-budget/
Just a detail: The name of the President of the European Commission is "von der Leyen" with "e" instead of "a".
I am also curious if you have any donation recommendations if the decision on PEPFAR will be final. Obvious candidates would be Give Well or the Global Development Fund of Effektiv Spenden if you live in Germany. But maybe you have other suggestions.
My God! Misspelling a surname is probably the worst you can do when are asking for something. Thanks for correction.
Positive suggestion, but the title for the post is confusing
In which sense? Any suggestion for a more clear one? In fact I changed once already, because it did not fit well in the Forum (was too long).
The use of the word “shall” makes it sound like you are confidently predicting the EU will do it, as opposed to to proposing asking the EU to do it.
Thank you for the redaction suggestions. I have decided to use "must" and I have corrected the misspelling in the president surname.
Regarding individual donations, I do not have suggestions, because this is too big for individuals. In my view this is a political opportunity for Europe: we know that the program works well, so it is low risk.
I would say that being replaced by the europeans is not exactly the optics that the current US government want in this issue, so probably the offer would increase the probability of continuation.
I think it was "will replace" when I wrote the comment but now it's "must replace"? If that's the case, it's better now.