On May 17, 2026, the World Health Organization declared the Ebola outbreak in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo—and its continued presence in Uganda—an “international public health emergency.” The following day, Africa CDC echoed this assessment. By June 5, both organizations had launched a joint six-month response plan and a $518 million funding appeal.

The Ebola strain driving this crisis, Bundibugyo, is particularly concerning as there are no approved vaccines or treatments. This marks the 17th outbreak in the DRC since 1976, when the virus was first identified in Yambuku. The current outbreak is striking a region already devastated by conflict and political instability, further complicating humanitarian and security challenges. How is this outbreak deepening vulnerabilities in eastern DRC? What risks does it pose to regional stability in Central Africa? And what does its resurgence reveal about the global community’s capacity to handle major health crises?

How Ebola is intensifying eastern DRC’s compounded crises

The latest Ebola wave is hitting an area already grappling with multiple overlapping crises. This strain, which can be fatal in up to 50% of cases, has no approved medical countermeasures. Eastern DRC—particularly North Kivu, South Kivu, and Ituri—remains highly susceptible to epidemic spread, compounded by last year’s severe cholera outbreak, one of the worst in 25 years, and the ongoing Mpox surge since 2020.

Ituri, the epicenter of the current crisis, is one of the most volatile provinces in the DRC. Poor road infrastructure, armed group violence, and nearly one million internally displaced persons living in overcrowded camps create conditions ripe for disease transmission. The region has been plagued by relentless instability since the M23 offensive in 2023, forcing communities into precarious living conditions that fuel the rapid spread of pathogens. The health system, already fragile, struggles to meet even basic needs, leaving populations dependent on external aid.

Health Minister Samuel-Roger Kamba Mulamba has called Ebola an “absolute emergency.” As of May 31, 2026, official reports confirmed 282 cases with 42 deaths, including 19 new positive tests. By June 1, the WHO reported 349 suspected cases under surveillance, mainly in Ituri’s Bunia, Rwampara, and Mongbwalu health zones. Bunia’s main hospital quickly became overwhelmed, forcing the establishment of peripheral and rural treatment centers. While the recovery of four infected healthcare workers offers some hope, the strain on the healthcare system has intensified. By June 5, six health centers in Bunia had been temporarily closed for disinfection, further reducing access to essential care for local residents, particularly pregnant women and patients with other conditions.

Crucially, the lack of coordinated response from Kinshasa exacerbates the crisis. Large parts of eastern DRC are under the control of armed groups like the M23, a proxy force backed by Rwanda. With no coordinated public health response involving these groups, the risk of further spread remains high. Negotiations may be underway, but no formal framework has been established to enable effective epidemic control in rebel-held territories. Two Ebola treatment centers are reportedly being set up in Goma, the M23-controlled provincial capital, but with limited capacity. The group claims to have implemented contingency plans, yet the epidemic continues to advance in areas under their control.

Community resistance also poses a major obstacle, echoing past outbreaks. In Rwampara, anti-response protests escalated to the point of incinerating the body of a suspected case. Distrust of health authorities runs deep. In eastern DRC, traditional burial rites—including washing and touching the deceased—are sacred. Yet these very practices are major transmission vectors for Ebola. The refusal to return bodies to families is seen as a profound cultural violation, fueling suspicion and resistance to public health measures. Long-standing grievances over state neglect, historical violence, and perceived predatory foreign interventions have amplified these tensions, turning health response efforts into symbols of external control.

Regional spillover: how Ebola threatens Central Africa’s stability

This outbreak occurs against a backdrop of tense relations between the DRC and its eastern neighbors, particularly Rwanda and Uganda. When an epidemic spreads in a state where parts of the territory lie beyond central government control, the response must be regional—or even continental. Africa CDC has warned that up to ten countries, including South Sudan, Rwanda, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Republic of Congo, Burundi, Angola, Central African Republic, and Zambia, could be affected. However, response capacities vary widely. Kenya and Ethiopia have relatively robust health systems and have begun setting up quarantine facilities, while Central African Republic remains heavily aid-dependent and vulnerable. South Sudan faces internal conflict compounded by spillover from the war in Sudan.

Because epidemics do not respect borders, porous frontiers and weak surveillance systems increase the risk of cross-border transmission. The WHO has confirmed imported cases from Ituri reaching North Kivu and Kampala, Uganda—where two travelers returning from the DRC tested positive, one of whom later died. A case was also reported in South Kivu, originating from Kisangani in Tshopo Province. In response, Uganda suspended flights and passenger transport with the DRC on May 21, and Rwanda closed its border with Goma. These unilateral measures have heightened diplomatic tensions and raised fears of significant economic repercussions.

Eastern DRC’s conflict is now intertwined with epidemic spread. Cities like Goma and Bukavu, captured by the M23 in early 2025, are hotspots for transmission. Health has become yet another battleground in the Kinshasa-Kigali rivalry, with the M23 effectively acting as a de facto public health authority in the areas it controls. To mitigate cross-border risks, the East African Community convened an extraordinary ministerial meeting on June 1–2, 2026. Ministers committed to harmonizing border health controls without imposing blanket closures, establishing a regional technical working group to coordinate surveillance, and strengthening diagnostic capacity and healthcare worker protection.

These measures are critical, but their effectiveness will depend on sustained political will and resource mobilization across the region.

Global health in crisis: the limits of international aid and shifting donor priorities

This outbreak is unfolding as the international humanitarian architecture faces unprecedented strain. U.S. funding cuts to global health programs, including the withdrawal from WHO and reductions to USAID and CDC, have weakened critical response systems. Experts suggest these cuts may have delayed detection of the outbreak. The DRC, Rwanda, and Uganda have since signed bilateral agreements with the U.S., shifting aid from multilateral frameworks to transactional, state-to-state arrangements totaling $900 million over five years. Yet this new model prioritizes American strategic interests over humanitarian principles, focusing first on protecting U.S. citizens. The State Department has pledged $23 million in emergency funds and up to 50 clinics, but has not signaled support for a WHO-led response—a stark departure from past practices.

With the WHO’s emergency fund weakened by reduced U.S. contributions, the response now hinges on national institutions in affected countries, supported by WHO and NGOs. The WHO declared the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and is coordinating the response, while the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) has issued risk assessments to support coordination with Africa CDC. On the ground, medical NGOs such as Médecins Sans Frontières and ALIMA have deployed clinical teams. The DRC Red Cross is mobilizing volunteers for safe burials, risk communication, and community engagement. Yet the humanitarian response remains critically under-resourced.

On June 5, 2026, Africa CDC and WHO launched a joint six-month response plan (June–November 2026) with a $518 million funding appeal. Rooted in the principle of “one plan, one budget, one team,” the initiative aims for coordinated action led by affected countries. It involves WHO, Africa CDC, UN agencies (UNICEF, UNHCR, WFP, IFRC, FIND), African governments, and international donors. So far, only $315.8 million has been pledged—falling short of the coordinated effort needed.

This hybrid approach highlights a growing tension: while African states engage in bilateral agreements with donors like the U.S., they also demonstrate the capacity to coordinate multilaterally during major crises. Whether this dual strategy can deliver sustained results remains to be seen.