The website for the United States Agency for International Development ( USAid ), the world’s biggest aid donor, has gone dark.
The State Department will be in charge of the automatic company under Donald Trump’s new administration’s plans. The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has today declared himself head of the agency to “align” it with Trump’s interests.
Rubio stated a few days ago, on January 26, that “every money we spend, every programme we bank, and every scheme we adopt may be justified with the response to the three straightforward issues: Does it produce America safer? Does it create America stronger? Does it produce America more profitable”?
But the choice to thaw USAid, which is part of Trump’s plan to place” America initial”, places all at hazard. Businesses that provide essential maintenance for disadvantaged people around the world are being forced to halt procedures. The manager of one for business said:” People did die”.
Elon Musk, the world’s richest person and a nearby adviser to Trump, is playing an active part in the loss of USAid. He has asserted that the organization is “beyond maintenance” without providing any supporting evidence. On X he wrote:” It needs to die”.
Musk, who is in charge of the newly established Department of Government Efficiency ( Doge ), is gearing up to reduce the US budget by trillions of dollars. Trump and Musk are appealing to an market that has a basic misunderstood US international support in general by presenting cuts to USAID as a solution.
Surveys show that Americans think that 25 % of the federal budget is used for international support. In reality, the US gives about 0.2 % of its gross national product ( GNP ), the total value of goods and services produced by a country, to foreign aid – or less than 1 % of its federal budget. This is significantly below the UN’s goal of 7 % GDP.
But, despite this, USAid provided 42 % of all humanitarian assistance globally in 2024. This included about US$ 72 billion in support in a wide range of locations, from helping people entry fresh water, sanitation, care and strength to providing crisis comfort, shelter and food.
USAid also delivered programs aimed at supporting democracy, civil society, economic development and landmine clearance in war zones, as well as working to prevent organized crime, terrorism and conflict. The demise of USAID will have a significant impact on security for people.
The Trump administration has granted a waiver from “life-saving humanitarian assistance” for the duration. This includes a program that provides access to anti-retroviral drugs for 20 million people who are HIV/Aids. But there are questions about the future of US Aids organization, the President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief ( PEPFAR ).
To date, over 43 million people worldwide have died from AIDS. However, the launch of PEPFAR in 2003 was one of the biggest successes of the George W. Bush administration. The World Health Organization says that PEPFAR, working in partnership with USAid, has saved 26 million lives.
PEPFAR employs more than 250, 000 doctors, nurses and other staff across 55 countries. One of the tasks that USAid is assigned is to order and purchase the medications used by PEPFAR to keep the millions of HIV-positive people alive. Will there be no suspension of federal funding for USAid’s locally operated partner organizations?
We are, in any case, likely to see an uptick in other infectious diseases. USAID had been working to stop the Marburg virus and mpox outbreaks from occurring in Africa right now. What the future holds for these programs is not known.
And USAid’s work with malaria, a disease that kills about 450, 000 children under the age of five each year, is facing uncertainty. From 2000 to 2021, USAid’s work helped to prevent 7.6 million deaths from malaria. Also in doubt is USAid’s effort to create and implement the malaria vaccine, which was deemed a breakthrough in the fight against the disease.
USAid also responds to an average of 65 natural disasters annually. In 2024 alone, it responded to 84 separate crises across 66 different countries. The government is removing all of the personnel necessary to carry out these kinds of programs.
Senior USAid officials have taken dozens of vacation days, and contractors have been fired from their jobs. 3,000 Washington, DC, aid workers could be laid off this week, according to reports.
The work of USAid is also crucial for preserving American interests, which Trump’s team members misunderstand. China will now have an opportunity to have more influence around the world, thanks to its more than US$ 1 trillion of assistance to infrastructure projects in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America since 2013. China receives a gift from the US in the struggle for soft power.
Global aid sector in disarray
Foreign aid depends on assurance and transparency regarding the viability of aid programs. While US foreign aid programs are being reviewed, the Trump administration has provided little clarity. Due to the uncertainty, one aid organization described the situation as an “absolute dumpster fire.”
There have already been reports of total confusion in health clinics that were shut down without warning that were previously supported by USAid. Africa is most likely to be the region that suffers the most. Local workers working on continent-wide healthcare projects will lose their jobs, while nurses, doctors, and healthcare workers working in various clinics will not be able to carry on their essential responsibilities.
Trump is not able to oust a congressionally funded independent agency, according to the Democrats. They have stated that legal challenges are already being raised and that they will try to stop Trump’s state department nominations from being approved until the shutdown is overturned.
During his first term, Trump attempted to reduce US foreign aid, but Congress objected. Then, he attempted to stop the flow of aid that Congress had authorized, but ultimately failed. This time, Trump is not bothering to play by the rules.
Natasha Lindstaedt is a professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex.
This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.