It's not quite like other infectious diseases (e.g. COVID), in that transmission is dependent on mosquitos as a vector.

If they've sufficiently damaged the vector one tourist alone cannot bring it back - the disease vector would also need to come back.

FTA:

> Certification is granted when a country proves that the transmission chain is interrupted for at least the previous three consecutive years.

And

> To get the WHO certification, a country must demonstrate the capacity to prevent the re-establishment of transmission.

Do you know whether that capacity is regularly reinvestigated? Because if not you could get the certification, wait a couple of years, and then dismantle all infrastructure while still reaping the, if ephemeral, benefits.

As if the main benefit of being certified malaria free is the certification instead of actually being malaria free?

I don’t think so. I don’t think malaria is contagious.

Malaria isn't contagious

That's technically correct, but an infectious person can infect another person over a vector (i.e. mosquitos).

So you get rid of mosquitos OR rid of malaria.

That’s true; I didn’t realize it could go human -> mosquito -> human but according to Google you’re right.

Isn’t that the only way? I’m pretty sure the human hosts are a vital step in the Plasmodium lifecycle.

Also not all species of mosquito transmit malaria, or have a much smaller chance of transmitting it. I remember watching a BBC programme where someone was researching whether malaria mosquito had returned to Britain (they hadn't).

So even if you would somehow introduce a few busloads of Malaria-stricken people, that's not likely to re-introduce Malaria.