Our minerals not a bargaining chip, Mr President!
Editorial Comment
ZAMBIA stands at a crossroads that will test the meaning of patriotism, sovereignty and leadership. President Hakainde Hichilema was elected on a promise to protect the national interest, restore dignity to governance and place the welfare of Zambians above all else.
That solemn duty must now guide him as the country reportedly edges closer to signing a secretive memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the United States (US), an agreement whose implications would mortgage Zambia’s future in exchange for conditional aid.
At the heart of the concern is not cooperation with foreign partners. Zambia has always benefited from international partnerships, and no reasonable citizen disputes the importance of health support in combating HIV, TB and other life-threatening conditions.
What is troubling is the suggestion that life-saving health assistance is being used as leverage to extract unfettered access to Zambia’s vast mineral wealth such as copper, cobalt, gold and rare earths that belong not to any government of the day but to the people of Zambia, including generations yet to be born.
Patriotism demands transparency. Any agreement that binds the nation, especially one with long-term consequences for health security, data sovereignty and natural resources, must be subjected to open scrutiny. Secret negotiations, tight deadlines and conditionalities that threaten to withdraw funding unless Zambia complies are inconsistent with the principles of democratic governance. They erode public trust and raise legitimate questions about whose interests are truly being served.
The fact that Zambia is being asked to trade access to minerals and sensitive health data whose use we do not know for reduced levels of aid, which was less than what had previously been announced, then this should alarm every citizen.
Aid that comes attached to coercive economic and resource concessions is not partnership. It is pressure. Zambia should not be placed in a position where the health of its people is held hostage to foreign commercial or strategic interests.
Equally disturbing are reported provisions on long-term data and pathogen sharing. While international cooperation in health surveillance is important, agreements that allow one-sided extraction of personal genetic and health data about individual citizens without their knowledge or consent over decades raise serious ethical, national security and sovereignty concerns.
Zambians have the right to know how their data will be used, who will benefit from it and what safeguards exist to prevent exploitation. Africa’s history offers painful lessons of resources and now data is being extracted with little benefit to local populations.
Hichilema must remember that leadership is not measured by how quickly agreements are signed, but by how firmly national interests are defended. The minerals beneath Zambia’s soil are strategic assets that should be leveraged transparently, competitively and for maximum local benefit. These mineral resources should benefit Zambians through industrialisation, jobs, value addition and sustainable development and should not signed away quietly in moments of pressure.
It would be a grave betrayal if Zambia’s mineral wealth were exchanged for aid that is both conditional and scaled down. Foreign assistance should complement national development, not dictate it. If funding has been unfairly reduced, Zambia should negotiate openly for its restoration, not compensate for the shortfall by surrendering control over its resources and policy space.
This moment calls for courage and restraint. Hichilema should suspend any rushed signing of agreements that lack transparency, place the full details before Parliament and the public and invite informed national debate.
Zambia is not desperate, and it should not be made to feel so. Our resources, our genetic data and our sovereignty are not bargaining chips.
History is unforgiving to leaders who sign away national wealth under the guise of necessity when they are actually doing it for their own political self-preservation. Hichilema still has the opportunity to demonstrate that his administration stands firmly on the side of the Zambian people. True patriotism demands nothing less.
