The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has long been a cornerstone of American foreign policy, tasked with promoting global development and advancing democratic values. From providing humanitarian aid during crises to fostering economic growth and supporting health initiatives worldwide, USAID’s work has been instrumental in strengthening the U.S.’s global influence.
However, the agency’s role and approach were significantly shaped during the Trump administration, with policies that introduced both shifts in focus and new challenges for USAID’s operations.
USAID’s Mission and Scope
USAID’s mission is to promote democracy, humanitarian assistance, economic development, education, and health programs across the globe. The agency’s portfolio spans over 100 countries, providing essential aid for critical issues like poverty alleviation, public health (including combating diseases like malaria and HIV), and fostering democratic governance.
One of USAID’s notable functions is its support of disaster relief. In times of crisis, such as natural disasters, conflicts, or pandemics, USAID steps in with both immediate relief efforts and long-term recovery plans. This includes delivering food, medicine, and infrastructure rebuilding while helping local governments establish sustainable systems.
Additionally, USAID’s programmes often focus on economic growth by fostering trade relationships, strengthening governance, and supporting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), ensuring the long-term stability of nations it assists.
The Trump Administration’s Impact on USAID
Under the leadership of President Donald Trump, USAID saw a significant shift in priorities, in line with the administration’s broader “America First” foreign policy stance. Trump’s policies reduced foreign aid commitments, redirected funds away from traditional development assistance, and introduced controversial budget cuts. For example, the Trump administration proposed drastic reductions to USAID’s budget, including cuts of up to 30% in 2018. This move was part of the broader effort to reduce U.S. spending abroad, focusing on a more transactional approach to foreign relations.
One of the more prominent examples of the administration’s policies affecting USAID’s scope of work was the shift towards bilateral negotiations with individual countries, often bypassing multilateral organizations like the United Nations. USAID, traditionally a key player in multilateral development initiatives, saw its role in global cooperation diminished under this more isolationist approach.
Moreover, the Trump administration also emphasized a “lean” approach to foreign aid, promoting accountability and alignment with U.S. national interests. As part of this strategy, USAID underwent restructuring efforts to prioritize areas like trade and investment over traditional development assistance. While these shifts aimed to promote U.S. economic interests, critics argued that they risked undermining long-term development goals in favor of short-term, transactional outcomes.
Right-Wing Criticisms of Development Aid and USAID
Right-wing critics of foreign aid, including figures within and around the Trump administration, have long questioned the efficacy and morality of providing financial assistance to foreign governments. Critics often argue that U.S. taxpayer dollars should be focused on addressing domestic issues rather than being spent abroad. From this perspective, development aid is seen as wasteful, with some claiming that it leads to dependency rather than fostering self-sufficiency in recipient countries.
USAID, in particular, has been a target of such criticism. Some conservatives argue that the agency often supports programs that do not align with U.S. interests and that aid does not always go to those who need it most, with concerns about corruption or inefficient allocation.
This view emphasizes a preference for a “hands-off” approach to foreign countries, where America’s role is limited to maintaining economic and diplomatic ties without directly intervening in foreign governance or social structures.
The Trump administration’s cuts to USAID’s budget and its call for reductions in foreign aid mirrored these right-wing views. By focusing more on strategic alliances and less on open-ended assistance programs, Trump’s policies sought to shift foreign aid into more tangible, national interest-driven transactions. The administration’s “America First” rhetoric resonated with many who viewed foreign aid as a tool for advancing U.S. power abroad, but one that had often failed to deliver concrete, direct benefits to Americans.
USAID’s Role in Combating Global Health Crises
Despite these challenges, USAID continued to play a critical role in addressing global health crises during Trump’s presidency, notably in combating the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the ongoing HIV/AIDS pandemic. Trump’s administration did express support for initiatives to fight the global HIV/AIDS epidemic, particularly through the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), though some critics argued the broader cutbacks to foreign aid could undermine the agency’s ability to meet these goals.
While some funding was diverted away from traditional USAID development programs, USAID’s public health programs remained a vital tool in U.S. diplomacy and its efforts to promote global health security, especially in Africa and Southeast Asia.
Moving Forward: The Biden Administration’s Approach
With the change in leadership, the Biden administration has signaled a shift back toward multilateralism and the emphasis of USAID’s traditional development goals. Increased funding for humanitarian aid, along with a renewed focus on global health and climate change, reflects a more holistic approach to foreign aid. The Biden administration’s vision for USAID is one where it not only addresses immediate crises but also builds resilience and long-term sustainability in the countries it serves.
While USAID’s core mission has remained the same advancing development and promoting democracy the Trump administration’s policies undeniably reshaped its focus and operations. The push for budget cuts, a more bilateral approach to foreign relations, and the prioritization of U.S. economic interests marked a clear departure from the traditional approach to international development aid.
As global challenges like climate change, pandemics, and geopolitical instability continue to evolve, USAID’s ability to adapt and fulfil its mandate will be tested. Its future, however, may well hinge on the balancing act between addressing U.S. national interests and fostering long-term development goals that align with global stability and prosperity.
