Outgoing United States Ambassador to Zambia, His Excellency Michael Gonzales, delivered a candid farewell address on May 1, 2026, sparking varied reactions from Zambian opposition figures regarding the state of governance and corruption in the nation. While acknowledging the long-standing partnership between Zambia and the United States, Ambassador Gonzales’ remarks were laden with strong criticisms, leading to both agreement and strong rejection from different political camps.

Ambassador Gonzales expressed profound frustration and disgust at what he described as official inertia and systemic issues within the Zambian government. He lamented ignored calls, unanswered questions, and cancelled meetings, characterizing the government’s response as a hollow ‘Noted. With thanks.’ A central point of his address was the revelation that despite over $7 billion in U.S. health assistance since 2000, Zambia’s health system nearly collapsed when funding was temporarily paused. Gonzales asserted that this fragility exposed a failure of successive Zambian governments to build robust internal systems, rather than a lack of capacity, and that medicines were systematically stolen. He also cited an alleged $4 billion in illicit financial flows to East Asia every year, money that could otherwise fund critical social services like hospitals and schools. Furthermore, he criticized the lack of arrests or prosecutions for individuals involved in the theft of medicines, questioning the sincerity of the ‘no sacred cows’ rhetoric when only political opponents faced legal action. He specifically highlighted AVIC, noting its chairman was convicted of corruption in China, yet Zambia awarded the company a $650 million road contract.

The opposition National Restoration Party (NAREP), through its President Ezra Ngulube, took strong exception to several aspects of Ambassador Gonzales’ speech. While respecting his diplomatic service, NAREP categorically rejected what it termed ‘mischaracterizations’ and ‘one-sided accusations,’ along with an ‘unacceptable tone of paternalism’ that disrespects Zambia’s sovereignty. Ngulube emphasized NAREP’s unwavering stance against corruption, advocating for transparency and accountability. However, he challenged the Ambassador’s claim of $4 billion in illicit financial flows, demanding verifiable, country-specific evidence and asserting that singling out Zambia without acknowledging the role of Western financial systems and tax havens was disingenuous. NAREP demanded that any specific evidence held by the U.S. be immediately handed over to Zambian law enforcement for action, rather than being used as a mere political talking point.

Regarding the disruption of health services, NAREP argued that the temporary funding pause exposed Zambia’s over-reliance on foreign aid and the inherent dangers of unilateral decisions by donor nations. Ngulube clarified that the U.S. paused funding based on its own internal political processes, not due to new findings of Zambian malfeasance. He contended that Zambia’s health system challenges are deeply rooted in decades of underinvestment, partly exacerbated by donor conditionalities that have historically discouraged domestic resource mobilization, thereby framing aid dependency as a structural trap rather than solely a moral failing of Zambian officials. NAREP urged the U.S. to share any intelligence on individuals who diverted donor medicines with the Anti-Corruption Commission and Drug Enforcement Commission, asserting that public shaming without supporting prosecutions only serves those who wish to label the entire country as irredeemably corrupt.

While agreeing with Ambassador Gonzales that the current administration had been dismissive and uncoordinated in its diplomatic engagement, Ngulube cautioned against conflating the incompetence of one government with the character of the Zambian people. NAREP reiterated its commitment to increasing domestic health financing, ending impunity, and strengthening national systems, proposing initiatives like a National Sovereignty Fund and mandatory asset declarations for public officials. Ngulube concluded his party’s response by stating that ‘criticism without partnership is just noise’ and firmly rejecting any demands for reforms made under the threat of withdrawing life-saving medicines for HIV patients, deeming such actions as coercion rather than diplomacy. He affirmed that Zambia would combat corruption for its own sake, not due to external demands, and welcomed accountability while rejecting humiliation.

In contrast to NAREP’s qualified rejection, opposition leader Mundubile expressed strong agreement with Ambassador Gonzales’ statements. Mundubile, who personally knows the Ambassador, praised him for removing ‘diplomatic gloves’ and speaking his mind, noting that Gonzales’ words mirrored concerns the Zambian opposition had been vocalizing for years regarding graft, particularly within the Ministry of Health. He echoed Gonzales’ frustration over the lack of arrests for stolen medicines and the $4 billion illicit financial flows. Mundubile highlighted Gonzales’ emotional plea and tears for the poor, affirming that corruption indeed robs the most vulnerable. He warned that this indictment must serve as a critical warning not only to Zambians but also to regional and international bodies like the EU, SADC, and AU, lest nations be ‘stolen’ by theft. Quoting Proverbs 29:4 – ‘By justice a king gives a country stability, but those greedy for bribes tear it down’ – Mundubile declared that ‘time to act is now before the nation is stolen,’ and shared the Ambassador’s sentiment that ‘hope is not a strategy.’ He concluded by stating that Gonzales spoke for millions of Zambians, expressing a shared disgust and the need for immediate action.