USAID’s future: What’s next for US foreign assistance? WSJ article

The Wall Street Journal has published an article by Gabriele Steinhauser shedding light on the funds the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) spent on international aid in 2023, exploring how shifting priorities under the "America First" agenda may reshape the future of U.S. foreign assistance. Caliber.Az offers its readers an analysed version of the piece.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has long been at the heart of American foreign aid efforts, channelling billions of dollars into humanitarian assistance, development programs, and military support. Established in 1961 under President John F. Kennedy, USAID has served as the chief vehicle for advancing U.S. foreign policy goals through economic, social, and strategic initiatives. In 2023, the U.S. allocated nearly $65 billion to foreign aid, with USAID managing approximately two-thirds of this funding. However, recent shifts in U.S. foreign policy and the “America First” agenda under President Donald Trump have raised questions about the future of these programs, the administration’s focus on military aid over humanitarian assistance, and the evolving real-world impacts of American aid.

The role of USAID in U.S. foreign aid

USAID has been central to addressing a wide range of global challenges, from promoting health and education in developing nations to supporting disaster relief efforts and building infrastructure in areas impacted by conflict. It has also been a key player in the fight against global diseases, including HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), created in 2003, is perhaps the most notable example of USAID’s success. Since its inception, PEPFAR has been credited with saving over 26 million lives, primarily in African countries. The program's efforts to distribute antiretroviral drugs have transformed HIV from a death sentence into a manageable chronic disease, and it continues to be one of the most successful global health initiatives in history.

Beyond health, USAID has also been instrumental in promoting democracy, good governance, and the rule of law in countries facing political instability. However, under the Trump administration, USAID has faced significant challenges, including budget cuts, a freeze on much of its funding, and a broader shift in focus toward military and strategic aid rather than humanitarian assistance.

The shift towards US military aid strategic alliances

In recent years, U.S. foreign aid has been increasingly tied to strategic interests, with an emphasis on military assistance to allied nations. The U.S. has long used foreign aid as a tool to strengthen relationships with key allies, especially in regions of strategic importance. Countries such as Israel, Egypt, and Jordan have been among the largest recipients of U.S. aid, not just for economic development but also to bolster their military capabilities. This trend has only accelerated in recent years, with military aid becoming a dominant feature of U.S. foreign assistance, particularly as the U.S. seeks to counterbalance the influence of adversaries like Russia and China in critical regions.

The freeze on foreign aid imposed by President Trump in 2017, followed by the waiver signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio in 2023 for lifesaving humanitarian assistance, signals a shift away from broad-based development programs toward more focused, strategic initiatives. The freeze, which initially targeted a wide range of foreign aid programs, left USAID in limbo and raised questions about how U.S. assistance will be structured moving forward. The Trump administration’s approach suggests that aid will increasingly be directed toward military objectives, with less emphasis on long-term development goals that do not directly serve U.S. geopolitical interests.

The decline of Africa’s share of American aid

One of the most notable shifts in U.S. foreign aid in recent years has been the decline of Africa’s share of the total aid allocation. While U.S. assistance to sub-Saharan Africa has historically been significant, particularly in the areas of health and education, this region has seen its share of U.S. aid decline in recent years. This trend reflects a broader shift in priorities, with a growing focus on regions deemed more critical to U.S. national security. For example, Ukraine, which received substantial aid following Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, has become one of the largest recipients of U.S. assistance, overshadowing many African nations that were once key beneficiaries of American foreign aid.

The decline in aid to Africa has raised concerns about the impact on development in the region. USAID and other U.S. agencies have played a key role in addressing public health crises, providing disaster relief, and supporting governance and democracy in African nations. However, as U.S. aid to Africa diminishes, there are fears that the continent may turn to alternative sources of support, such as China and Russia, for development assistance.

The real-world impact of the aid

Despite the shifting priorities in U.S. foreign aid, the real-world impact of American assistance remains significant. In the health sector, initiatives like PEPFAR and U.S. funding for vaccines, nutrition, and malaria prevention have made tangible improvements in global public health. Countries that have received substantial U.S. aid, particularly through USAID, have seen reductions in child mortality and improved access to life-saving medical interventions.

For instance, a 2022 study published in Population Health Metrics found that countries receiving above-average USAID funding saw a 29-death reduction per 1,000 live births in under-five mortality. Similarly, U.S. support for the containment of diseases like Ebola has helped prevent the spread of deadly infections in vulnerable regions.

However, not all U.S. aid programs have been equally successful. In countries like Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso, where U.S. support for local militaries and governance initiatives has been extensive, the results have been less positive. These countries have experienced coups and political instability, with new ruling juntas seeking closer ties with Russia and expelling U.S. military forces. This raises questions about the effectiveness of military assistance in fostering long-term stability and whether such aid may sometimes exacerbate political tensions rather than resolve them.

Looking forward: The USAID legacy

As the Biden administration navigates the aftermath of Trump-era foreign policy decisions, the future of USAID and U.S. foreign aid remains uncertain. While there is still strong bipartisan support for programs like PEPFAR, the broader direction of U.S. assistance is likely to continue emphasizing strategic interests, particularly in regions where geopolitical competition with Russia and China is most pronounced.

For USAID, the challenges are manifold. The agency must contend with shifting priorities within the U.S. government, a more complex global landscape, and the need to justify its existence amid a broader push for smaller government and fiscal austerity. Moving forward, the agency will need to adapt to these changes, finding ways to balance the need for strategic military aid with the ongoing demands of global health, development, and humanitarian assistance.

Ultimately, the impact of U.S. foreign aid will depend on how effectively it is directed toward the most pressing global challenges, whether it is combating pandemics, alleviating poverty, or supporting democratic institutions. As the world continues to grapple with complex issues like climate change, conflict, and migration, U.S. foreign aid, particularly through USAID, will remain a critical tool in shaping the future of global development and international relations.