China Power | Diplomacy | East Asia

Why Is China Less Active in the 2026 Ebola Epidemic?

Ten years ago, China was a prominent source of Ebola aid. Today, China’s more powerful but its response is less than many expected – especially as the U.S. steps back.

An Ebola treatment center in Bunia, the DRC, constructed by the World Health Organization.

The Ebola epidemic spreading through the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) could become the largest Ebola outbreak on record if infections continue at their current pace. More than 6,700 people had been infected and more than 3,200 had died by September 2026. The outbreak is caused by Bundibugyo virus, a form of Ebola for which there is currently no licensed vaccine or approved treatment.

The crisis is unfolding at a remarkable moment for global health. The United States is retreating from the global health system it once led. Beijing is the world’s second-largest economy and holds substantial interests in the DRC’s copper and cobalt industries. That matters not because Beijing has an obligation to replace Washington. Rather, the outbreak offers a test of whether, as the United States pulls back from global institutions, China will step forward.

During the 2014-2016 West African Ebola outbreak, which caused approximately 11,325 deaths and more than 28,600 cases, China emerged as an unexpectedly prominent donor. By late 2014, Beijing had provided assistance valued at 750 million yuan, including laboratories, food aid, and health personnel. What was particularly striking, however, was the speed with which China’s aid arrived. Ebola was first detected in Guinea in March 2014, and by April, China had sent 4 million yuan worth of assistance. This was quickly followed by several firsts for Beijing, including the use of chartered flights to deliver humanitarian relief and the deployment of its first overseas infectious-disease field hospital.

Western countries, on the other hand, were slower to react. It was not until the outbreak had expanded dramatically during the summer of 2014 that the United States, Britain, and other major donors mounted large-scale responses. By then, China had already been providing assistance for months. Although Western countries would ultimately contribute more money, the significance of China’s early response went beyond its dollar value. It demonstrated Beijing’s growing willingness to assume a visible role in international affairs, foreshadowing a decade of intensifying geopolitical competition. 

Humanitarian concerns were not the only interests at stake. Officially, Chinese authorities talked about South-South cooperation, multilateralism and subtle criticism of Western indecisiveness. Western analysts, however, saw additional strategic interests, such as reducing the risk that Ebola would reach China and testing Beijing’s capacity for overseas power projection. 

The response offered scientific benefits as well. The crisis gave Chinese scientists rare access to outbreak data and field specimens. Chinese teams gained valuable experience establishing and operating mobile biosafety laboratories, capabilities that would later become increasingly important as China expanded its role in infectious-disease preparedness.

China today is wealthier, more diplomatically influential, and far more technically capable than it was a decade ago. Yet as of late August 2026, Beijing had provided $4.5 million – around 30.2 million yuan – in direct support to the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and sent a few teams of medical experts. All assistance is valuable. But the level of support from China remains far smaller than many would have expected.

On the American side, despite the Trump administration’s broader retreat from foreign aid and its “America First” approach to global health, the United States has committed more than $512 million directly to Ebola response. Furthermore,........

© The Diplomat