The recent decision by the Trump administration to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has sparked significant backlash from Democrats in Congress and raised alarms regarding the potential influence of billionaire supporter Elon Musk on government decisions.
As the leading global provider of foreign assistance, the United States stands out, although some European nations allocate a larger percentage of their budgets toward aid. USAID operates in approximately 120 countries, funding initiatives that aim to combat epidemics, boost educational opportunities for children, ensure access to clean water, and foster other essential developmental areas.
This halt in operations has drastically disrupted numerous projects, resulting in the layoff of nurses and the closure of clinics across more than 25 countries, particularly those facing the highest rates of child mortality globally, according to Janeen Madan Keller, a policy fellow at the Center for Global Development.
USAID has played a pivotal role in diverse regions, including efforts to safeguard the Amazon rainforest and combat drug issues in South America. The agency has been essential in delivering humanitarian aid in Colombia, supporting conservation in the Brazilian Amazon, and working on coca eradication programs in Peru. Additionally, in 2024 alone, USAID allocated $45 million to the U.N. World Food Program, mainly for assisting Venezuelan refugees fleeing economic turmoil.
In Brazil, the main initiative under USAID is the Partnership for the Conservation of Amazon Biodiversity, which aims to protect the environment while improving the living conditions of Indigenous peoples and local communities. Meanwhile, in Peru, part of the $135 million funding for 2024 focuses on developing alternatives to cocaine production, such as coffee and cacao, a mission USAID has pursued since the 1980s.
In Africa, last year, the U.S. provided over $6.5 billion in humanitarian aid to the sub-Saharan region. However, following the announcement of the funding freeze, many clinics supported by the successful President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) found their doors closed, leaving HIV patients with limited access to care. Aaron Motsoaledi, South Africa’s health minister, expressed his bewilderment over the aid suspension, highlighting the severe impact it could have on the country’s HIV/AIDS response, which relies on U.S. funding for nearly 20% of its $2.3 billion budget.
The suspension of U.S. aid could also lead to repercussions in eastern Congo, where American assistance is vital for providing access to food, water, electricity, and basic health care for roughly 4.6 million individuals displaced by conflict. According to a European diplomat, while discussions on increasing aid from European nations are ongoing, they may not sufficiently compensate for the absence of U.S. funding.
In Ghana, the development group Chemonics International has suspended logistical support for several critical health programs, including those focused on maternal and child health, malaria response, and HIV. Educational projects have also come to a standstill in Mali, a nation plagued by conflict where USAID has become a key humanitarian ally. In Sudan, ravaged by civil war and facing outbreaks of cholera, malaria, and measles, the suspension of aid poses a risk to 600,000 people, according to anonymous sources.
USAID also finances governance and media programs in nations where Russian influence is prominent, like Georgia and Armenia. Support had notably surged for Armenian initiatives aiming to diminish ties with Russia and fortify relations with the U.S. and the EU. However, the aid freeze has compelled independent broadcasters to scale back their operations significantly.
In conflict-stricken Syria, the organization Doctors of the World Turkey reported that it had laid off 300 staff members and closed 12 field hospitals serving the area. With USAID constituting 60% of its funding, the organization drastically reduced its daily patient consultations. Hakan Bilgin, the president of the group, called the situation dire, particularly for the millions of individuals in northern Syria dependent on external medical services.
In the Balkans, women’s groups in Kosovo are concerned about the potential loss of American funding for initiatives promoting gender and diversity, which could leave these organizations vulnerable. Similarly, advocacy groups in Bosnia fear that halted programs aimed at combating discrimination may exacerbate existing social tensions.
In Uganda, the repercussions of funding cuts are being felt by organizations that support LGBTQ communities, as a non-profit recently had to cease operations due to the funding freeze, threatening progress made in protecting sexual minorities in a nation where such identities are criminalized.
The freeze is also impacting support for crucial initiatives in Myanmar, where $39 million earmarked for promoting rights and media is now on hold amid the military government’s crackdown on dissent since seizing power. Additionally, funding for landmine clearance efforts in Cambodia has been halted, leaving a gap filled by Chinese funding.
Finally, U.S. assistance in Ukraine, which has been crucial for various humanitarian efforts, now faces cuts that could affect the ongoing conflict response, particularly in light of the significant costs involved in maintaining evacuation support centers. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy anticipates a substantial reduction in aid, especially concerning the energy sector, which has been under attack.
