Tshisekedi took charge of the DRC's response to Ebola. How can he make a difference

The most recent outbreak of Ebola in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is raging. The number of new cases has continued to increase for one year since the first report of the outbreak. This despite the intensive use of an experimental vaccine, new treatments and a faster response to the epidemic compared to the epidemic in Africa. l & # 39; West.

Until recently, the response to the Ebola virus was coordinated by the Minister of Health. But in July, President Felix Tshisekedi announced that he would badume this function and appointed Dr. Jean-Jacques Muyembe, pioneer of the Ebola virus disease, to lead this initiative. The announcement resulted in the resignation of Minister of Health Oly Ilunga Kalenga.

But the decision was strategic and meaningful and is likely to mobilize national and international support. The Ebola virus has now spread to Goma, a city of two million inhabitants and a major hub of international transit. According to some estimates, only half of the cases are counted.

The epidemic calls for a coordinated response from all ministries. Indeed, its social, cultural, political and economic implications are important.

As head of state, Mr. Tshisekedi will be able to ensure that the problems are solved. These are:

• from one ministry in charge of responding to a multi-agency response with a very high level of ministerial commitment,

• to raise awareness of the intensity of the threat at the highest international level and to obtain stronger international support,

• obliging different state and non-state actors to coordinate their activities, and

• send a clear message that the disease is a national threat.

With the coordination of the response by the president, the ministers will have to support the country's efforts.

That's what happened in Liberia in 2014, when President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf took charge of managing the country's response to Ebola. This has provided the government with leadership that has forced local and global actors to coordinate their interventions and change the course of a disease.

While this was true and easy in Liberia, we must admit the complexity of the DRC. First, it is a much larger country. Second, some parts of the country do not accept central political leaders.

Lessons from Liberia

When the outbreak began in Liberia in 2014, coordination of the response was transferred from the Ministry of Health to Home Affairs and then to uncoordinated working groups led by different leaders. But the change had little effect, the epidemic continued to escape the country.

At this point, the number of cases per month from July to August 2014 increased from 249 to 1,048.

This changed when Johnson-Sirleaf took over coordinating the response in the framework of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Ebola. She appointed Tolbert Nyenswah, then Deputy Minister of Health, to lead the incident management system. Key ministries and partners such as the US Centers for Disease Control have started meeting weekly with Nyenswah.

The coordinated leadership of the president was crucial at this stage, given the rising epidemic curve. Cases had increased until 2080 only in September and 3077 in October 2014. This increase in the number of cases would have threatened the peace and security of the country if the president had not taken charge of the direct coordination of the answer.

On top of that, Johnson-Sirleaf has made a pbadionate appeal to the US government and the international community. The army was deployed and colossal resources were provided, which led to the last effort to end the epidemic. Under this new coordination mechanism, Ebola cases began to decline rapidly in November 2014.

At the beginning of the Ebola response in Liberia, the lack of coordination was evident. This lack of coordination has also been cited as a major obstacle to efforts to contain Ebola in the DRC.

In addition, international partners may not coordinate well due to the lack of clear political will to guide the DRC response.

But that may change now that Tshisekedi is in charge. He can make sure that all partners involved have a single coordinated plan. It will therefore be much more likely that the strategies it formulates will be implemented and supported by the partners.

What needs to be done

Tshisekedi's direct involvement can help the DRC overcome some of the most important obstacles to ending this epidemic.

First, as chair, it can bring together citizens who have already doubted the reality of the epidemic and mobilize provincial leaders to actively participate in the response.

Second, it can increase security. The epicenter of the current epidemic is North Kivu, a region devastated by ongoing violent conflict. The Ebola treatment centers were destroyed and a doctor was killed in April of this year.

Third, it can redouble its efforts to provide a comprehensive response. Only 50% of the financial support required for the response has been provided. The international response has already evolved since Tshisekedi took over the response to the Ebola virus. The World Bank has committed $ 300 million just days after the announcement.

Tshisekedi can take advantage of the fact that the World Health Organization recently declared the outbreak of a public health emergency of international concern. This is a decisive moment for the DRC and its president. It must respond to the public, use its regional and international political capital to enhance security and mobilize resources to quickly end the response.