Disgraceful end of USAID The dirty side of Samantha Power’s agency

The further you go into the forest, the more firewood you find. This proverb comes to mind when you begin to delve deeper into the activities of the so-called "United States Agency for International Development" (USAID), which has recently been relegated to the dustbin of history. More specifically, it applies to the side of its operations that was carefully concealed for many years behind a shiny façade, away from the eyes of diligent investigative journalists, and which remained off-limits due to its special secrecy from outsiders.

as it turns out, there was indeed something to keep secret. Behind this empire, which devoured billions of dollars of American taxpayers' money, was the very type of activity that the agency's leaders, in their public documents, cynically described as their "program" or, so to speak, their goal to combat and eliminate.

For simplicity, let’s explain it this way: the proclaimed goal of fighting "corruption" by an organization that was itself mired in unprecedented levels of corruption; advocating for an independent press by an agency that financed media (often through "black cash") and, as a result, enslaved journalism and brought various influential and heavily publicized outlets under its control; calls for free and democratic elections while the very authors of these calls directly influenced the electoral process, organized street riots, and even violence during the election period; anti-terrorism slogans set against the backdrop of the agency's secret funding of terrorist organizations; condemnation of corruption while being involved in bribing politicians and recruiting agents of influence, and much more. In simpler terms, this is the case where a thief fights theft through more of the same theft.

It is this hidden side of USAID's activities that is revealed when you start to examine what has been carefully concealed from the public eye for many years. Let’s be honest: we probably wouldn't have learned about all these facts had Donald Trump not won the presidential election and appointed Elon Musk as head of the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) — in other words, without the efforts of the Trump administration to cut government spending.

What a hornet's nest is being uncovered these days as a result of investigating USAID’s activities! Take, for example, the realm of the press. For many years, Azerbaijan was at the center of unfounded criticism from both the U.S. State Department and Congress, national parliaments of many Western countries, as well as several publications and international organizations such as Freedom House, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, and many others. We were accused of all kinds of mortal sins! There was the so-called "dire" situation with human rights in Azerbaijan, the supposed absence of independent media in the country, an alleged army of "prisoners of conscience" "suffering in our domestic jails," "dishonest" elections, the infamous "caviar diplomacy," and many other scare stories. We made countless efforts to explain the unfounded nature of all these absurd accusations and to point out the obsessive desire of foreign critics to find a speck in our eye, while ignoring the beam in their own. It’s not to say that we were able to easily prove their mistakes. Not at all. And this was due to the simple unwillingness of the other side to listen to counterarguments. They preferred to hear only themselves.

And suddenly, help came from an unexpected source — from the U.S. President's administration itself, which opened the closet of dirty laundry and spilt all its foul contents for the public to see! Now it turns out that the Reuters agency received $9 million from the Department of Defense for what Elon Musk called a "large-scale social deception" on social media platform X.

"Reuters was paid millions of dollars by the US government for ‘large scale social deception’. That is literally what it says on the purchase order!" Musk wrote.

President Trump demanded that Reuters return the funds paid to them by the U.S. government. "Return the money immediately," Trump wrote on the social media platform Truth Social.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reported that $8 million of American taxpayers' money had been spent on a subscription to Politico, which continues to publish articles that are often blatantly anti-Azerbaijani. Well, the subscription is understood — it's essentially the same as funding or, let's say, bribery, but under the guise of a "subscription."

After the cessation of funding from USAID, BBC Media Action did not deny that 8% of its revenue came from U.S. government assistance. However, the management of BBC Media Action stated that this entity was "separate" from BBC News. But does that really matter!

And then, if we look at BBC separately, here are the top 10 donors for the 2023–2024 period:

▪️ UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO): £3.02 million
▪️ USAID: £2.613 million (as we can see, second place)
▪️ Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA): £1.625 million
▪️ Conflict, Stability and Security Fund: £1.397 million
▪️ European Commission: £1.342 million
▪️ Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SIDA & Swiss Agency): £1.188 million
▪️ UNICEF: £1.042 million
▪️ Global Affairs Canada: £907,000
▪️ Counterpart International: £875,000
▪️ Swiss Development Agency: £867,000

So, whether BBC Media Action denies its connection to BBC News or not, both entities were receiving funding from USAID.

"BBC is literally state-funded media," Elon Musk wrote on social media platform X, sharing an infographic that particularly highlighted the financial role of USAID.

Elon Musk also gave separate and, it must be said, justified criticism to the infamous Radio Free Europe, which, according to him, consumes around a billion dollars. "Yes, shut them down. Europe is free now (not counting stifling bureaucracy). Hello?? Nobody listens to them anymore. It’s just radical left crazy people talking to themselves while torching $1B/year of US taxpayer money," he wrote on X.

In addition to Western media, it's worth noting some liberal outlets in post-Soviet countries that also received instructions from their sponsors to smear Azerbaijan. Among them, some Ukrainian and Russian publications, recognized as foreign agents, stand out. In this regard, they tried to keep up with the likes of Der Spiegel and others.

Special attention should be given to the funding of the now-dismantled international terrorism agency. For example, the New York Post reported that humanitarian aid shipments from USAID were found in a Hezbollah weapons warehouse in Lebanon. During a patrol in a Lebanese village where a Hezbollah base was located, retired Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) soldier and current executive director of the Misgav Institute for National Security, Asher Fredman, discovered sniper rifles, anti-tank missiles, and explosives next to packages marked with, of all things, USAID.

According to Fox News, USAID allocated no less than $122 million to fund groups linked to terrorist organizations.

"Billions more of federal dollars have been given to leading American aid charities which have consistently failed to vet their terror-tied local partners and show little interest in improving their practices, to the apparent indifference of the federal government," the TV channel notes.

Over $900,000 was allocated to a so-called "charitable" organization from Gaza called the Bayader for Environment and Development Association, which has close ties to Hamas. Funding began in 2016, with the last tranche being made just days before Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. Reports also indicated that as recently as last year, USAID approved a $12.5 million grant for the American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA), which is also a "long-time partner" of Bayader. Additionally, the agency funded the Islamic Relief Association (ISRA), which also collaborates with Hamas. In 2004, the U.S. designated ISRA as a terrorist organization due to its connections with Osama bin Laden.

USAID's activities were also largely focused on influencing elections. According to Elon Musk, too much of what USAID did was aimed at influencing elections in dubious ways that didn't hold up to scrutiny. He added, "If we talk about the return on investment, I would say that overall, it wasn't always very good."

Now it’s clear where the roots of this years-long anti-Azerbaijani hysteria, which has been prominent on TV screens, internet pages, and radio waves of many influential global media, come from. He who pays for the champagne, dances with the lady. And this is just the tip of the iceberg, revealed through a very superficial examination. It's frightening to imagine what lies beneath the surface. Since 1991, USAID has spent over $410 million on projects in Azerbaijan. In active grant programs, i.e., those operating in the Azerbaijani direction at the time of the agency's shutdown, the amount involved was $17 million! Can you imagine?!

USAID and others, bribing the media and keeping them financially dependent, accused Azerbaijan of lacking an independent press. While sponsoring fifth columns and various colour revolutions with elements of violence and interference in the electoral process, Azerbaijan was accused of "non-transparent" elections. By smuggling undeclared cash into the country, bypassing state customs authorities, it was accused of corruption. This is the face of those whose attacks Azerbaijan has had to face for many years! You can't hide the truth forever. All that is secret will eventually be revealed. Today is the day of USAID’s exposure.

Next in line—others.