MIAMI — When President Donald Trump halted foreign aid for a period of 90 days, he claimed this action was necessary to eliminate wasteful spending and to curtail what he describes as “woke” expenditures that he believes do not serve American interests.
However, experts caution that this suspension carries more grave implications: it may reinforce the power of authoritarian leaders. Hidden within the billions of dollars the U.S. allocates for foreign aid each year—more than any other nation—are numerous grants aimed at supporting grassroots groups committed to promoting democracy in countries ruled by authoritarian regimes.
Among the organizations that will miss out on vital financial support are those that educate poll workers to identify electoral fraud in Venezuela’s recent presidential elections, activists seeking democracy in Cuba and China, and Belarusian exiles who are campaigning against their leader’s oppressive regime ahead of a superficial election.
Thor Halvorssen, founder of the Human Rights Foundation, highlights the damaging message sent by cutting funds to these crucial efforts. “This action sends a detrimental signal to authoritarian regimes and undermines the courageous people advocating for freedom,” he said, noting that investments in these programs should not merely be restored but prioritized.
Congress had projected at least $690 million for pro-democracy initiatives this year, targeting what experts classify as the globe’s most repressive nations: Belarus, China, Cuba, Iran, Nicaragua, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela.
Much of this funding is directed through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which has experienced significant layoffs. This move was partly influenced by efforts from billionaire Elon Musk, who has aimed to shut down the longstanding agency as part of a broader spending reduction strategy.
Initiating the aid freeze on his first day in office, Trump indicated that all assistance would undergo scrutiny to determine whether it enhances U.S. safety and prosperity.
To reform USAID, Trump has enlisted Peter Marocco, a former U.S. Marine and conservative activist from Dallas, who briefly served in the agency during Trump’s previous term. Marocco has yet to respond to inquiries, while the White House referred to Trump’s disparaging remarks about USAID, which he has labeled as operating under “radical left lunatics.”
While some funding for programs that align with Trump’s “America First” mission may eventually resume, authoritarian figures across the globe appear to be celebrating the newfound opportunity, ramping up their assaults on dissenters.
In Venezuela, Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, a key enforcer for the ruling party, gleefully declared the U.S. aid to the opposition a “black box of corruption” during a recent state television appearance, vowing an investigation. Meanwhile, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev expressed on social media hope that the “notorious Deep State doesn’t consume” Musk for his actions against the agency.
In Nicaragua, a state-owned television network maintained that “Trump turned off the faucet” meant for the “terrorists,” while Iranian media mockingly stated that the U.S. was treating its allies like “disposable tissues.”
Belarus’s President Alexander Lukashenko lauded Trump’s funding cuts to the “fugitive opposition,” interpreting it as a response to his government’s requests for a reset in bilateral ties.
Lena Zhivoglod, leader of Honest People, which was established in 2020 to provide a counter-narrative to Lukashenko’s regime, indicated that job layoffs and an office closure are imminent.
“This is not merely about 15 Belarusian expatriates losing their jobs in Poland,” she emphasized. “It signifies yet another defeat against the propaganda machinery of the Lukashenko regime and Kremlin, which relentlessly bombards Belarusians.”
Similarly grim circumstances unfolded in Venezuela, where journalists uncovering corruption among high-ranking officials, organizations aiding political prisoners, and election monitors revealing evidence of electoral fraud against President Nicolás Maduro are among the casualties of the funding freeze.
Organizations urged anonymity in this report due to fears that the government could invoke a new law criminalizing the reception of international funding. “Trump is doing what Maduro could never achieve: suffocating civil society,” lamented one activist affected, who, starting Monday, began terminating numerous contractors vital to mobilizing opposition against Maduro.
Thor Halvorssen asserted that while reviewing programs is warranted to ensure taxpayer funds are utilized effectively, pro-democracy initiatives are among the most powerful mechanisms for advancing U.S. interests. Despite this, public opinion surveys consistently indicate that Americans perceive the U.S. to be overly generous in foreign aid, despite lower contributions than nations like Norway and Sweden, with foreign aid making up less than 1% of the federal budget.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has similarly suffered due to the aid freeze, focusing much of its recent efforts on Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela—countries where government institutions are often dominated by loyalists. This commission has been crucial to the U.S.-led Inter-American system since the 1950s and relies heavily on Washington’s contributions as its central base. It has recently been forced to lay off nearly a third of its workforce.
Roberta Clarke, the commission’s president, labeled the funding freeze as “extraordinarily disruptive and extraordinarily cruel” during a call with her team to discuss the suspension. One senior manager likened the funding crisis to an unprecedented situation in her 24 years with the commission. Another veteran manager described the organization as facing the possibility of “collapse.”
“I would say good afternoon, but it’s not a good afternoon,” Clarke, who is originally from Barbados, remarked at the start of the call, a recording of which was shared under conditions of anonymity.
Previous administrations, including the initial Trump presidency, have consistently supported democracy advocates resisting China’s ruling Communist Party. These funding halts leave organizations—particularly those engaged with issues in Tibet and Hong Kong, as well as with the Uyghur community—financially exposed and at risk of retaliation from Beijing without recourse.
Some within the Republican Party are expressing concern that Trump’s actions could undermine U.S. strategic and national security interests.
“We appreciate President Trump’s commitment to thoroughly review expenditures and foreign assistance efficacy, but we hope this process is timely,” stated Daniel Twining, president of the International Republican Institute, which oversees programs in some of the most perilous countries for activists. “Dictators and adversaries like China aren’t waiting.”