Providing HIV assistance while undermining political stability is a high price for other countries to pay and I'm sure is a net negative for them.
You're taking that as a prior when in reality US FoPo prefers political stability after the Cold War. You need to get a grip here if you're seeing everything through the lens of dubious paranoia, if not just leftist resentment.
I should rephrase that to "political instability with regards to the perspective of locals".
I agree the US is seeking "political stability" with these activities. But it's on US terms which is often in direct opposition to the locals.
And I'd argue my view is not "dubious paranoia". The purpose of USAID is to use development activities as a cover for interference in other country's politics.
Look at the role of USAID during the Vietnam War under CORDS. It funded the "strategic hamlet" program which uprooted rural civilians into barb wire enclosures and provided arms and training to militia.
That doesn't sound like international aid.
Look at the Phoenix Program during the same war. It was an intelligence program which sough to identify "VC infrastructure" within rural villages and "capture or kill".
One can argue that such activities are beneficial to the US, but claiming it's soft and cuddly "international aid" for countries in need is just not accurate.