Other than being located on the continent of Africa, what do Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Cote d'Ivoire, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe have in common?
Their individual economies, at '07 average exchange rates, are all smaller than the $48 billion in aid money being appropriated over the next five years to 'fight'* AIDS on the Dark Continent.
Of the sub-Saharan nations, only Angola, Nigeria, and South Africa (and Sudan if it is counted as such, which is understandable since most of its wealth comes from the sub-Saharan southern portion of the country) have annual economies that surpass the amount to be doled out by the US.
The total economy of sub-Saharan Africa in exchange rate terms in '07 was $808.8 billion. The AIDS bill totals nearly 6% of sub-Saharan Africa's annualized GDP. So it's sort of like another nation giving the US $820 billion over half of a decade. That'd be a donation exceeding what has been spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over the same period of time.
That's a staggering amount of money from an African perspective. Apparently the revelation that the AIDS pandemic has been overblown hasn't been bad for business.
* This verb choice irritates me, as fighting AIDS is--excepting those who are born HIV-positive--as easy as avoiding the behaviors that transmit the disease.