SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " congo " 432 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
What to know about new Ebola outbreak that has killed 65 people in Congo
Africa’s top public health body has confirmed a new Ebola outbreak in Congo’s Ituri province, the 17th since the disease first emerged in the country in 1976.
A look at major Ebola outbreaks and when the disease was first identified
African health officials say there is a new outbreak of the Ebola disease in the Central African country of Congo, with at least 246 suspected cases and 65 deaths
A new Ebola outbreak is confirmed in a remote Congo province, with 65 deaths recorded
Africa CDC, the continent’s top public health body, on Friday confirmed a new Ebola outbreak in Congo’s remote Ituri province, with 246 suspected cases and 65 deaths recorded so far.
Health officials raise alarm over new Ebola outbreak in DR Congo
Concern is high regarding the potential spread of the virus amid a precarious security situation in the affected area.
Ebola outbreak kills 65 in eastern DR Congo's Ituri province
Africa's top health agency says around 246 cases have been reported.
Africa top health body confirms new Ebola outbreak in remote Congo province
Africa’s top public health body has confirmed a new Ebola outbreak in Congo’s remote Ituri province
Africa's top health body confirms new Ebola outbreak in remote Congo province
Africa's top public health body has confirmed a new Ebola outbreak in Congo’s remote Ituri province.
Africa's top health body confirms new Ebola outbreak in remote Congo province
Africa CDC says Ebola outbreak confirmed in Congo's Ituri province
The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) said on Friday that there was a confirmed outbreak of Ebola virus disease in Congo's Ituri province.
Fake rumors, real killings: Inside Congo's deadly health misinformation crisis
Angry mobs attacked and killed Four health workers conducting vaccination research in an episode that took place in October.
Fake rumors, real killings: Inside Congo's deadly health misinformation crisis
In Tshopo, a northeastern Congolese province blanketed in rainforest, rumours rippled through villages late last year claiming a mysterious illness had caused men's genitals to atrophy.
U.S. Forging a Healthier Oceania Through Trump Administration's America First Global Health Strategy Through Bilateral Health Memorandum of Understanding with Papua New Guinea - U.S. Embassy & Consulates in China
United States Forging a Healthier Oceania Through Trump Administration’s America First Global Health Strategy Through Bilateral Health Memorandum of Understanding with Papua New Guinea Press Statement Thomas “Tommy” Pigott, Principal Deputy Spokesperson April 23, 2026 Yesterday the United States and Papua New Guinea signed a five-year bilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) through the Trump Administration’s America First Global Health Strategy. The landmark health MOU focuses on effectively addressing emerging infectious diseases and ongoing outbreaks, building and maintaining surge-response capacities, and enabling Papua New Guinea’s government to independently manage new health threats before they spread internationally. Working with Congress, the United States intends to provide $15 million through December 2030 through the jointly decided health MOU, building on decades of progress in reducing HIV infections and transmissions in Papua New Guinea. The government of Papua New Guinea intends to allocate up to $3 million to disease control programs and strengthen health systems at the national and provincial levels. Up to $5 million under the health MOU will directly support global health security funding, advancing our shared commitment to health security in the region. Through the signing of this $18 million MOU, we are bolstering infectious disease prevention and response by leveraging cost-effective, nationally-driven approaches, with the goal of increasing Papua New Guinea’s health system self-sufficiency. America First Global Health Strategy Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) signed so far represent more than $20.6 billion in new health funding, including more than $12.8 billion in U.S. assistance alongside $7.8 billion in co-investment from recipient countries, building on decades of progress fighting HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and other infectious diseases around the world. As of April 22, the State Department has signed 32 bilateral global health MOUs with Angola, Bolivia, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Guinea, Honduras, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, and Uganda.
Trump Talks on Sending Afghans to Congo Draw Bipartisan Ire
Lawmakers in both parties said President Trump should continue allowing Afghans who worked alongside American troops to settle safely in the United States.
After Long Avoiding Politics, Commodity Traders Cozy Up to Trump
(Bloomberg) -- For decades, the world’s biggest commodity traders have sought to remain outside of politics, doing deals with anyone who has natural resources to buy or sell. Now, Donald Trump is changing the rules of the game. Most Read from BloombergHormuz Chaos, Lebanon Clashes Dent Trump Peace Deal HopesNvidia Makes Quantum Computing CEO a Billionaire in DaysTrump Says Iran Will Suspend Nuclear Program as Hormuz OpensThe Jet-Fuel Surge Is Making Global Flight Connections DisappearCongo to To
Snail-Borne Diseases in Central Africa: Lessons from Citizen Science
The ATRAP project in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Uganda provides insights to the factors that shape citizen science practice in low- and medium-income countries (LMIC).
What happened when I followed a Voodoo priest from New Orleans' Congo Square to lunch
Lunch at a hookah lounge with a Voodoo high priest was not on columnist Jan Risher's 2026 Bingo card, but it happened.
From The Sports Desk: World Cup qualifying drama
Turkey, Iraq and the Democratic Republic of Congo are in. Italy is out for the third consecutive tournament.
Once World Cup outsiders, soccer-scarce nations are crashing the party
A 52-year World Cup drought is over for the Democratic Republic of Congo, which joined Iraq, Turkey and Czechia as unlikely qualifiers.
World Cup Playoffs Scores, Live Updates: Congo DR Qualifies; Bolivia-Iraq Up Next
Following along for the top moments and highlights of the World Cup intercontinental playoffs.
Italy stunned out of World Cup as Türkiye joins USMNT group; Sweden, Czechia, DR Congo qualify
Italy misses third straight World Cup as Türkiye joins USMNT group; DR Congo vs. Jamaica live updates
2026 World Cup playoffs live updates, scores: New Caledonia faces Jamaica as DR Congo awaits winner
'Blackwater' lakes and rivers in the Congo Basin are now emitting ancient carbon into the atmosphere
Carbon that has been buried in the Congo Basin's peatlands for millennia is seeping into lakes and rivers. Why this is happening remains unclear, but researchers warn that tropical peatlands could be nearing a tipping point.
CMOC Congo Mine Pollution Damaged Local Health, Report Says
Air pollution by the world’s biggest cobalt producer appears to have damaged the health of local communities in the Democratic Republic of Congo, according to an investigation by environmental groups.
How the IRC supports women’s health amidst crisis in remote regions of the DRC
In times of conflict, women and girls face the greatest risks—violence, exploitation and limited access to essential care. This International Women’s Day, discover how the International Rescue Committee (IRC) is supporting survivors of gender-based violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Fostering Health Sovereignty in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Through the America First Global Health Strategy - United States Department of State
Today, the United States and the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) signed a five-year bilateral health cooperation Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that advances the America First Global Health Strategy while protecting Americans and Congolese from infectious disease threats. Under the MOU, working with Congress, the Department of State intends to provide up to $900 million […]
Evaluation of WHO’s coordination in health emergencies helps guide humanitarian reforms
The recent evaluation of the Global Health Cluster sheds new light on how WHO, in its unique role as the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Cluster Lead Agency (CLA) for health, coordinates life-saving health responses in humanitarian crises. It highlights how WHO works through partnerships to reach the most vulnerable crisis-affected populations and strengthen collective action in increasingly complex emergencies. Serving both learning and accountability purposes, the evaluation provided timely and actionable recommendations that are helping to strategically position WHO during the ongoing IASC Humanitarian Reset and the broader UN 2.0 reforms, where prioritization and new ways of working are taking shape. The evaluation was conducted between 2024 and 2025, at a time when humanitarian action funding was plummeting by more than 50%, triggering the launch of the IASC Humanitarian Reset. While restructuring and prioritization across the humanitarian landscape were underway, the evaluation, through iterative feedback loops, shared emerging findings that helped identify the most crucial coordination functions needed. This was especially important at a time when humanitarian needs and health risks due to armed conflict and natural hazards were increasing, while the capacity of health partners to support Member States to equitably reach all populations affected by crises and deliver response was at risk. The evaluation found that the Global Health Cluster (GHC) remains a highly relevant mechanism for strengthening health coordination in crises and has delivered efficiently despite limited resources. It noted strong collaboration with partners and highlighted opportunities to deepen integration within WHO structures and further enhance inter-cluster cooperation. The evaluation also identified areas where greater emphasis on transition planning, national coordination capacity and linkages between humanitarian response and health system strengthening would bring added value. While the GHC has achieved many of its strategic objectives, improvements in monitoring systems would help better demonstrate collective impact. The recommendations will help strengthen the IASC CLA coordination function across WHO, at all levels, and with all partners. It is noted that going forward WHO needs to continue to support capacity to fulfil coordination functions, in line with the IASC Humanitarian Reset whilst ensuring collective prioritization of health cluster action and quality coverage of the health response. The evaluation will help WHO strengthen locally-led action, national ownership and leadership of the sector, and linkages between health system strengthening activities. Additionally, the evaluation evidence will be used to optimize resource mobilization for the GHC and strengthen WHO’s capacity to deliver, plan for and monitor and evaluate results across the Organization. Read the evaluation Global Health Cluster https://healthcluster.who.int/ WHO’s work in health emergencies https://www.who.int/emergencies/overview
The Call to Art, Africa, and Politics
In 1964, CT urged Christians to “be what they really are—new men and women in Christ.”
The New WHO Pandemic Treaty and Global Health Governance: Incorporating Common but Differentiated Responsibilities into PABS - Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
On May 20, 2025, the World Health Assembly unanimously adopted the World Health Organization (WHO) Pandemic Agreement, an international treaty designed to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. The product of three years of arduous negotiations, the treaty marks a new era of global cooperation in public health. However, core aspects of the agreement remain unresolved—notably the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) System, which is intended to ensure equitable access to pandemic-related materials and benefits. To support the successful implementation of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” should be formally incorporated into the negotiating agenda of the PABS annex. Introduction For the first time, an international treaty has enshrined the principle of “One Health,” the compelling idea that the health of animals, humans, and the environment all contribute to pandemic risks. SARS (2003), H1N1 (2009–10), Ebola (2014–16), and COVID-19 all emerged through zoonotic spillover from animal hosts—respectively, civets, hogs, and bats. Together, they underscore the need for a coordinated, cross-sectoral approach. The Pandemic Agreement responds to this call, requiring state parties to acknowledge the ecological interplay and commit to a comprehensive “One Health” strategy. Specifically, Article 5 charges governments to address “the drivers of pandemics and the emergence and re-emergence of infectious disease at the human-animal-environment interface,” including wild animal markets, deforestation, and antibiotic overuse. Yet the effectiveness of this “One Health” vision depends equally on the free flow of scientific information and data among countries and institutions. Just as environmental and animal health factors have been neglected in past global frameworks, so too has data sharing been marginalized, despite its centrality to timely detection and response. The Pandemic Agreement takes an important step by requiring governments to enhance data collection and cooperate with the World Health Organization (WHO). However, these provisions will remain aspirational without a robust Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) annex. The PABS system will determine whether countries and researchers can rapidly exchange pathogen samples and genetic data while ensuring equitable access to resulting research and development, including diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. Without such mechanisms, the treaty’s promise to operationalize “One Health” and strengthen global preparedness will risk becoming largely symbolic, echoing earlier failures to translate shared principles into coordinated action. Equity Concerns When the 2025 Health Assembly adopted the Pandemic Agreement, it left the difficult question of access to pathogens and the sharing of resulting benefits to be addressed in a separate agreement. Negotiations on this separate agreement, PABS, are now underway in Geneva. Yet governments remain divided over fundamental questions of equity between the countries that primarily contribute to the system and those that primarily draw from it—and consequently benefit. For example, wildlife in countries bordering the equator is likely to produce PABS materials, but companies in Europe are likely to use them to develop lucrative products. The most likely contributor countries are likely to be those biodiverse countries around the equator, such as Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Indonesia, where the number of human-mammalian viral host interactions is large. Conversely, countries most likely to benefit from this material are those with the technology, investors, and infrastructure to capitalize on genomic data, such as the United States, EU member states, and Japan. This imbalance reflects a broader pattern seen in prior international frameworks. Now, as in the past, the wealthiest countries in the world (a useful heuristic is membership of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)) disproportionately benefit from systems in which pathogens and genomic sequencing data are contributed to a common source. Under the International Agreement on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (the “Plant Treaty” or “Seed Treaty”) and the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework, companies from Europe and North America disproportionately withdraw biological samples and data for development into lucrative medical products. Their governments and companies have both statutory and contractual claims to the products that those companies correspondingly produce. PABS appears poised to follow the same pattern. The text calls for strong language on access to pathogens and associated data, but the corresponding benefits that should flow to poorer countries are couched in equivocal or non-binding language. Common but Differentiated Responsibilities To address these inequities, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” should be formally incorporated into the negotiating agenda of the PABS annex. Common but differentiated responsibilities are often a feature of climate change negotiations. The basic principle is that, even though all countries should reduce carbon emissions, governments that became rich and powerful through massive carbon emissions (e.g., France, the United Kingdom, the United States) should have a greater obligation to address the resulting crises. Applied to PABS, it would require that governments hosting and supporting companies developing lucrative products carry greater obligations toward the cost of running the PABS system; share benefits or final medical products; and transfer technology to help countries worldwide develop their own capacities to innovate and manufacture vaccines during an emergency. For example, an annex could mandate that any company based in an OECD country that withdraws PABS material would be obligated to donate the resulting diagnostics, therapeutics, or vaccines to the WHO during a public health emergency or pandemic. Questions remain about how robust those donations would be, but the principle is that they should deliver highly significant lifesaving benefits to be equitably shared. Theoretically, this approach mirrors the PIP Framework, in which companies withdrawing influenza samples are required to pay half of the operating costs. In practice, however, the framework has fallen short. The PIP Framework Secretariat has struggled to secure payments from companies, with companies often disagreeing over how much is owed. Additionally, without another pandemic influenza to test the strength of the agreement during a public health emergency, corporate compliance with sharing mechanisms remains unknown. Even if these limitations did not characterize the PIP Framework, partially paying for operating expenses does not address the inequity in access to genetic data and pathogen samples that left less developed countries last in line for COVID-19 vaccines (and, before them, H1N1). Common but differentiated responsibilities would go further, addressing governments’ legitimate grievances regarding information sharing. It would make withdrawals of PABS material and resulting products more transparent, building trust across the board. Enforcement and Enduring Success A key implication of this approach is that the governing mechanism of the PABS must have real enforcement authority. The WHO Pandemic Agreement delegates its core governance responsibilities to a Conference of the Parties (COP)—a governing body composed of one representative from each participating government, similar to those established under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement COP is charged with oversight functions but ultimately possesses no real authority to compel a government to take any action it does not wish to take. The text does not give the COP the ability to, for example, sanction a party that does not comply with either textual obligations or PABS provisions. In other words, there are no effective mechanisms in place to ensure compliance. Perhaps just as significant, establishing a meaningful enforcement mechanism within the PABS system would strengthen the WHO’s credibility and its ability to ensure compliance across global health governance. By setting a precedent for accountability, such a mechanism could enhance the organization’s authority not only within the Pandemic Agreement but also in enforcing the revised International Health Regulations and other frameworks for public health emergencies. Conclusion The PABS annex can—and should—be different. It should establish clear responsibilities for funding as well as for sharing the diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines that result from contributions to the system. The system, in turn, must include a dedicated body empowered to hold governments and the corporations they sponsor accountable for their responsibilities before, during, and after pandemics. Doing so would restore trust in the broader agreement, which was eroded as commitments were repeatedly diluted while parties scrambled to meet their own self-imposed deadlines during the Pandemic Agreement negotiations. A robust PABS Annex would cement a grand social bargain. Wealthier countries and their corporations would gain unimpeded access to scientific information essential for developing and manufacturing lifesaving medical products. As such, they would stand to gain considerable economic benefit. Yet that privilege must be matched with responsibility. The grand bargain must include not only the right to innovate, but also the duty to ensure that innovation serves all. As medical products are developed and produced through collective contributions, every person must have equal access. All human beings deserve an equitable chance to survive—to save their own life, the lives of their families, and the well-being of their communities. … Sam Halabi, JD, MPhil, is the Bette Jacobs Endowed Professor at Georgetown University’s School of Health and the Director of the Center for Transformational Health Law at Georgetown Law. He serves as the co-lead for the WHO’s Working Group on Regulatory Consideration on AI and Health’s training workstream. He earned his JD from Harvard, his MPhil from Oxford, and undergraduate degrees from Kansas State University. Lawrence Gostin, LLD (Hon.), JD, BA, is University Distinguished Professor and Founding Director and Timothy and Linda O’Neill Professor of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law. He is the author of Global Health Security: A Blueprint for the Future (Harvard University Press, 2021); Global Health Law (Harvard University Press, 2014); Public Health Law: Power, Duty, Restraint (University of California Press, 3rd ed., 2016); Public Health Law and Ethics: A Reader (University of California Press, 3rd ed., 2018); Law and the Health System (Foundation Press, 2014); Principles of Mental Health Law & Practice (Oxford University Press, 2010). He also directs the WHO Collaborating Center at Georgetown University. Image Credit: United States Mission Geneva, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Two of Trump's peace deals at risk as fighting surges in Congo and at Cambodia-Thailand border
At least two of several agreements aimed at ending global conflicts that President Donald Trump has hailed as evidence of his negotiating prowess are in trouble and at risk of collapsing
Ebola outbreak in Congo declared over by health officials
An Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo is now over, Congolese health officials announced on Monday, after the country went 42 consecutive days without recording a new case.