The Trump administration has recently moved to destroy the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) as we know it. This shocking decision has sent waves of concern through global aid organizations and public health advocates. Secretary of State Marco Rubio took the plunge. He ordered the total liquidation of USAID’s overseas staff and moved authority for foreign assistance programs directly under the control of the State Department. On Jan 20, President Trump signed an executive order to take down the “job killing rules.” This order froze all foreign assistance, pending a review.
In March, Erica Y Carr, the acting administrator of USAID, stepped up with powerful moves. She ordered the outgoing officials to erase classified records during the transition period. They destroyed these materials by shredding and in “burn bags.” This directive has garnered significant bipartisan condemnation for jeopardizing transparency and accountability in U.S. foreign aid.
“Shred as many documents first, and reserve the burn bags for when the shredder becomes unavailable or needs a break.” – Erica Y Carr
The fallout from these changes has been severely punitive and draconian. Following the closure of USAID’s offices, staff received an email informing them not to report to work after servers were removed and leadership was either fired or placed on disciplinary leave. We have heard it from folks who know chief of mission at U.S. embassies — get ready for radical changes. They only have four months to prepare.
Elon Musk recently made headlines when he boasted about feeding USAID “into the woodchopper,” while disseminating false claims about the agency’s programs. One famous example was a $50 million boondoggle that was supposed to distribute condoms in Gaza. As it turns out, this claim has finally been debunked. Collectively, these statements have done a tremendous disservice to the complicated narrative surrounding USAID’s role in the future of international development.
Howard Van Vranken, a former ambassador to Botswana, issued a clean cable on USAID. This move is a powerful signal of the swelling backlash from ex-officials against the current administration’s hard-line, combative stance. Critics are sounding the alarm that these drastic cuts could be devastating to ongoing global health efforts. Those projections predict that reduced funding will result in nearly 1 million of those children going without treatment for acute malnutrition. As a result, there are fears that as many as 160,000 additional lives may be lost to malaria in the ensuing decade. What’s more, another 200,000 children are likely to be stricken with paralysis from polio should these severe cuts persist.
The implications of these changes go well beyond the operational ins-and-outs of USAID. Advocates for global health and development are rightly alarmed. They’re concerned about the downstream impacts on at-risk populations that are wholly reliant on U.S. foreign assistance for life-saving basic goods.