The US government under President Donald Trump has announced a comprehensive shakeup of the US development aid agency USAID. The talk ranges from restructuring or integration into the State Department to complete closure of the organization. Immediately after the announcement, USAID funding was frozen for an initial 90 days and thousands of employees and contractors worldwide are laid off. With the end of USAID as we know it, a fundamental upheaval in international development cooperation and democracy promotion is imminent.
Notably, the US is currently the largest donor of Official Development Assistance (ODA). In 2023, the US spent almost $65 billion on ODA, out of which USAID expended almost was responsible $50 billion. USAID’s mission, as mandated by the US Congress, includes promoting socio-economic development and improving people’s living conditions around the world, particularly in the Global South. This includes ongoing reconstruction aid to Ukraine. USAID is also one of the most important international players in the support of democracy and human rights.
In the past, USAID has always been closely linked to the foreign and economic policy interests of the US. Critics have accused USAID of representing a (neo-)liberal, neo-colonialist world view or acting as an extension of US security policy interests, among other things. This criticism could certainly have justified substantive reforms. The drastic restructuring or perhaps even closure would go far beyond a simple reform.
As members of the Research Network External Democracy Promotion, we project titanic long-term consequences for international development cooperation and democracy promotion if the announced plans are fully implemented. We draw particular attention to four potential consequences:
Destruction of established partnerships
The abrupt termination of many or even all projects are destroying an extensive, well-established network of partnerships. There were already signs of cuts in the US development budget before Donald Trump took office. The current situation goes far beyond that. If the US government continues to dismantle USAID at the current pace, it will create path dependencies that will be difficult to reverse. The unilateral termination of cooperation agreements, the dismantling of trust-based partnerships, and the loss of experienced staff will make it difficult to rebuild networks and trust, even if US development policy is realigned at a later date. Overall, the US is at risk of losing its principal and fundamental instrument of soft power.
Loss of vital development projects
Countless projects in the countries of the Global South that represent central pillars of health management (e.g. vaccination campaigns), peacebuilding or humanitarian aid are already being discontinued or put on hold. These projects often complement (weak) state structures and in particular benefit vulnerable groups such as women and children. The loss of this support risks leading to considerable social and economic instability. In addition, the US is signaling a loss of solidarity in its international relations with these massive cuts.
Leaving the field open for autocratic actors
The discontinuation of USAID programs would leave an enormous funding gap and a power vacuum. Autocratic donors such as China, the Gulf States or Russia stand ready to fill this gap to broaden their own authoritarian networks and generate new dependencies. For Russia, for example, this could prove to be a strategic opportunity to forge a broader network of potential allies. The dismantling of USAID therefore has far-ranging security policy relevance.
Fatal signaling effects and further erosion of democracy
The impending closure of USAID signals that democracy promotion is no longer a priority in US foreign policy. That risks to spread to other democracy-promoting actors also reducing or even discontinuing democracy-promoting programs. In addition, the domestic politics of Western democracies risk being affected if Western governments follow the US government and weaken their own democratic norms and institutions. Populist and extremist movements will feel emboldened by the Trump administration to further undermine democratic institutions and principles. Thus, signaling effects in both the international and domestic spheres will likely further reinforce the global trend towards democratic backsliding, especially in politically fragile democracies or those challenged by populist forces. Last but not least, the destruction of USAID sends a disheartening signal to democratic movements and opposition forces in authoritarian states. These movements committed to democratic values and positive change in their societies, are now at even greater personal risk. They are deprived of important and often decisive support for concrete action.
With the Trump administration’s decision, international development cooperation and democracy promotion are facing the most fundamental turning point since the end of the Cold War. At that time, the systemic bloc confrontation between capitalist democracies and socialist dictatorships came to an end, which led to a reassessment and reorientation of Western democracy promotion. The withdrawal of the US will cause another fundamental shift in the international development architecture, with far-reaching geopolitical and normative consequences.
What do these developments mean for Europe? European governments and their development agencies must prove that they stand by their partners in the Global South and elsewhere (such as Ukraine), regardless of the US administration’s decisions, and that they will continue to support development projects financially. The fourth United Nations Financing for Development Conference in June 2025 offers a good opportunity to then reaffirm commitment to global solidarity. The European Union must live up to its self-defined role as a normative foreign policy power, i.e. it should actively promote development and democracy and credibly support a rule-based multilateral order. Critically, Europeans should not leave the field to authoritarian forces without a fight.
This article has previously been published on edp wire.
Latest posts by Sonja Grimm (see all)
Latest posts by Tina Margarete Freyburg (see all)
Latest posts by Julia Leininger (see all)
Latest posts by Solveig Richter (see all)
- USAID Facing its End? Likely Consequences for International Democracy Promotion - 7. Februar 2025
- A punto de escalar: grupos indígenas se movilizan en contra del gobierno en Colombia - 18. April 2019
- On the brink of escalation: indigenous groups mobilize against the government in Colombia - 17. April 2019
Latest posts by Jonas Wolff (see all)
- USAID Facing its End? Likely Consequences for International Democracy Promotion - 7. Februar 2025
- Die Weltordnung und der Systemwettbewerb: Zur außenpolitischen Positionierung der Parteien im Bundestagswahlkampf - 4. Februar 2025
- Tödliche Gewalt gegen friedlichen Aktivismus. Was wissen wir über die Ermordung von Menschen, die sich für Menschenrechte, Land- und Umweltschutz engagieren? - 15. Oktober 2024
