By Michael Gwarisa
For decades, the condom has been one of the most recognisable symbols of the global fight against HIV.
Cheap, effective and relatively easy to distribute, condoms have been at the centre of prevention programmes that helped drive down new HIV infections across the world. But a new UNAIDS report is now sounding an alarming warning: just as the world struggles to get back on track towards ending AIDS as a public health threat by 2030, funding cuts are hitting one of HIV prevention’s most basic tools.
Between 2024 and 2025, condom purchases declined “drastically and suddenly” in some countries, according to UNAIDS. More startlingly, funding for condom programming in one bilateral donor programme plunged by 93% over the same period.
The figure is not a measure of global condom funding, nor does the report identify the bilateral programme in the section discussing the decline. But the message is unmistakable: HIV prevention is being squeezed, and condoms are among the casualties.
The warning comes at a precarious moment for the global AIDS response.
In its 2026 Special Report for the 26th International AIDS Conference, UNAIDS says decades of progress against HIV are under threat from an unprecedented disruption in international financing. External funding for the HIV response in low- and middle-income countries fell by 18% in 2025 compared with the previous year, putting programmes that depend heavily on donor support under immense pressure.
While countries have moved to protect lifesaving HIV treatment, prevention programmes appear to be more exposed.
That raises an uncomfortable question: in the race to protect people already on treatment, is the world allowing the tools that prevent new infections—including condoms—to fall through the cracks?
The prevention paradox
UNAIDS paints a picture of an HIV response increasingly forced to make difficult choices.
When funding suddenly disappears, governments and health programmes naturally prioritise keeping people living with HIV on treatment. Interrupting antiretroviral therapy can have immediate and potentially fatal consequences. But prevention programmes do not always enjoy the same protection.
The danger, however, is that cutting prevention today can create a much bigger treatment burden tomorrow.
UNAIDS says domestic and international funding for HIV prevention programmes in sub-Saharan Africa was substantially reduced in 2025. Prevention programmes and community-led services, the report warns, are often not prioritised when countries are scrambling to mobilise limited domestic resources.
That vulnerability is particularly concerning in sub-Saharan Africa, where prevention efforts have historically relied heavily on international assistance. According to UNAIDS, 83% of prevention funding in the region in 2024 came from donor assistance. Across low- and middle-income countries, HIV prevention accounted for just 11% of total HIV funding, while two-thirds of prevention financing came from external sources.
In other words, prevention was already heavily dependent on donors before the latest funding shock.
The sudden reduction in condom purchases therefore should not be viewed simply as a supply-chain issue. It is a symptom of a deeper crisis: a global HIV response in which the financial foundations supporting prevention are becoming increasingly fragile.
New tools cannot replace everything
The funding crisis comes at a time of major scientific advances in HIV prevention.
PrEP has transformed the prevention landscape, offering people at substantial risk of HIV additional protection against infection. New long-acting prevention technologies are also generating enormous excitement and could reshape the global response.
But UNAIDS’ latest report shows that these innovations are emerging alongside—not instead of—a weakening of established prevention programmes.
The report notes major declines in PrEP access in some countries between 2024 and 2025. Cameroon, Nigeria and Zambia each recorded declines of more than 50% in the number of people receiving PrEP at least once during the year. At the same time, countries such as Ethiopia and Uganda expanded access through domestic and other funding sources, demonstrating that national investment can cushion programmes from external shocks.
The lesson is clear: there is no single magic bullet in HIV prevention.
PrEP, condoms, treatment as prevention, voluntary medical male circumcision, harm reduction and community-led prevention programmes all play different roles. A prevention revolution built around new technologies will mean little if the basic infrastructure needed to reach people is simultaneously being dismantled.
For millions of people, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, condoms remain one of the most accessible forms of HIV prevention. A collapse in funding for condom programming could therefore have consequences far beyond the number of condoms purchased.
It can affect procurement, distribution networks, community outreach, education and programmes designed to ensure that condoms actually reach the people who need them.
Progress is real—but increasingly fragile
The irony is that the world has made extraordinary progress against HIV.
UNAIDS estimates that new HIV infections have fallen by 42% globally since 2010, and by 59% in sub-Saharan Africa. AIDS-related deaths have also fallen sharply, declining by 57% between 2010 and 2025.
Zimbabwe is among the countries that have recorded significant progress. UNAIDS lists Zimbabwe among seven high-burden countries that had achieved at least a 78% reduction in new HIV infections since 2010, placing them on track towards the global goal of a 90% reduction by 2030.
But the report repeatedly warns that these gains are fragile.
The world is already off track to meet the 2030 target of ending AIDS as a public health threat. In 2025 alone, UNAIDS estimates there were one million more new HIV infections and 400,000 more AIDS-related deaths than there would have been if the world was on track to meet its targets.
Against that backdrop, slashing prevention funding appears particularly risky.
A reduction in condom purchases may not immediately produce a headline-grabbing crisis. The effects of prevention cuts are often delayed. But infections prevented today are treatment costs avoided tomorrow.
A warning that cannot be ignored
The 93% fall in funding for condom programming should therefore be read as more than just another statistic buried in a global report.
It is a warning about what happens when prevention becomes negotiable.
UNAIDS says countries have stepped in to protect treatment programmes amid funding cuts, but urgent action is needed to safeguard HIV prevention and community-led services.
The challenge now is whether governments, donors and global health institutions will learn from that warning.
The HIV response cannot afford to become a system that waits for people to become infected before investing in them. Treatment is essential, but prevention remains the most effective way to reduce the number of people who will require lifelong HIV care in the future.
As the world celebrates scientific breakthroughs and looks ahead to new prevention technologies, UNAIDS’ message is a sobering one: the future of HIV prevention cannot be built by abandoning the tools that helped bring the epidemic under control in the first place.
And among those tools, the humble condom may be sending one of the loudest warning signals yet
