The Alleged Health Agreement Between Kenya's William Ruto and the US Under Donald Trump: Why It Raises Questions

The Alleged Health Agreement Between Kenya's William Ruto and the US Under Donald Trump: Why It Raises Questions On December 4, 2025, Kenyan President William Ruto and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio signed a landmark five-year health agreement in Washington, D.C. It marks the first global health pact under the Trump administration's "America First" policy. The agreement is worth US$2.5 billion (approximately 323 billion Kenyan shillings). The US is contributing US$1.7 billion, and Kenya US$850 million. Its aim is to combat infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis, as well as to modernize the Kenyan health system through the acquisition of new equipment, the training of healthcare professionals, the expansion of health insurance, and disease surveillance. Ruto described the agreement as a "historic step" toward universal healthcare and acknowledged the previous US aid, which he said had saved the lives of millions of Kenyans. He also emphasized the efficient use of the funds. The agreement replaces the fragmented USAID programs that Trump dissolved in early 2025 and prioritizes “allied” partners like Kenya, which has supported the US-led effort in Haiti. Although the agreement promises significant improvements to Kenya’s struggling health sector—potentially saving lives and advancing universal healthcare—it has sparked widespread mistrust and debate, particularly regarding data privacy, transparency, and geopolitical implications. The reasons for these concerns are manifold. One of them is data privacy. Reports indicate that the agreement grants the US government and American companies extensive access to Kenyan health data, including real-time insights into patient records, in exchange for financial support. Critics fear that this could expose sensitive information such as HIV status, tuberculosis treatment histories, vaccination records, genomic data, mental health information, insurance claims, hospital stays, and even biometric data (e.g., names, locations, and fingerprints from healthcare facilities). Legal experts argue that this violates Article 31 of the 2010 Kenyan Constitution, which guarantees the right to privacy, including the protection of personal health data. Without effective safeguards, data could be misused for undesirable purposes, such as surveillance, commercial use by US companies, or epidemiological studies that extend beyond public health objectives. Cybersecurity concerns are serious: Granting access to foreign actors increases vulnerability to hacking, data manipulation, data extraction, or misuse and could transform Kenya's healthcare system into a tool for US mass surveillance. As one expert noted, this could allow the US to "monitor anyone using a Kenyan healthcare facility in real time." Furthermore, there are fears regarding a lack of transparency and full disclosure. The full text of the agreement has not yet been published, reinforcing calls for closer scrutiny. Kenyans and civil society groups are questioning which specific categories of data will be shared and how they will be protected. Health Minister Aden Duale promised a swift release (as of December 7, 2025) and assured that only anonymized, aggregated data would be shared to prevent the tracing of individuals. However, skeptics doubt these assurances, pointing to the hasty signing and the agreement's lack of transparency. This reflects criticism of Ruto's government over opaque foreign agreements. Some see it as a "drawback" for Kenya—valuable national data being traded for short-term financial aid. Concerns about fairness. The "America First" strategy prioritizes US foreign policy objectives and could neglect multilateral initiatives like PEPFAR (which has saved 25 million lives worldwide since 2003). Kenya's selection as the first African signatory is seen as a reward for its commitment to Haiti, but carries the risk of alienating partners like China, which has invested heavily in Kenyan infrastructure and could retaliate economically. Domestally, the agreement puts pressure on Kenyan institutions to absorb direct US funds, fueling fears of inefficiency and dependence. Experts warn of the loss of control over "biometric and epidemiological data" that could influence US strategies in areas such as migration, security, or even population control. The public and experts have reacted strongly. Public discourse and media coverage have highlighted these risks. Articles amplify the impact of the “dangers of patient data” and call for parliamentary oversight. Experts such as Professor [von Nation] and Kyle Spencer (Uganda Internet Exchange Point) emphasize the need for inviolable legal protections. The government counters that the agreement strengthens accountability and promotes universal healthcare. Ruto assures that “every dollar will be used efficiently.” While the agreement could transform Kenya’s healthcare system, concerns persist, stemming from fears of data colonization, constitutional violations, and unequal power dynamics after USAID funding ends. Full disclosure and independent audits are crucial to addressing these concerns. @https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/politics/article/2001535858/ruto-trump-data-agreement-raises-eyebrows-over-sh200b-health-risk