The sudden dissolution of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in February 2025 eliminated the leading US institution used to administer foreign aid assistance, redirecting approximately $34 billion in annual humanitarian and development funding to try and reduce the national deficit.[1] This action shows the fundamental shifts occurring in US foreign policy priorities due to the current administration; which stops new grants and contracts that helps establish global health, emergency relief, and economic development programs.[2]
Background
US foreign policy has used development aid as one of its primary tools and examples of soft power in its international strategy. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy announced that a centralized aid program, USAID, would begin and centralize the role of foreign assistance. In the middle of the Cold War, the initial mandate of USAID served as a tool to counter Soviet influence by showing that the benefits of capitalism and democracy far outweighed communist and authoritarian regimes. A strategy used to try and win “the hearts and the minds” of nations that were still developing.[3] This was not just a values-backed move made by the United States to show their liberal values, but rather a calculated move to help build alliances and contain communism during the Cold War. USAID’s projects were meant to be symbols of American partnership and Western ideals–whether the projects were sending vaccines, medical care, or building infrastructure in rural areas.
After the Cold War, USAID made minor changes but did not lose the strategic importance it had during the war. USAID then became the leading agency in helping to address and solve transnational threats. One example is its role in administering the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which was credited with saving millions of lives around the world and helping during the AIDS/HIV epidemic.[4] As research has shown, a more stable and prosperous world is less likely to create terrorist threats, conflicts, or refugee crises that directly endanger the US or the interests of the US.[5] For example, looking at the work done by USAID in post-conflict zones showed that its work was crucial for stabilizing the areas and helping prevent the resurgence of extremist or terrorist groups.[6]
USAID is tied to the pillars of American values and the grand strategy chosen to lead its foreign policy post-WWII. This program had bipartisan support for decades, as it had shown throughout the years that their initiatives of targeting food security, education, disaster relief, and medical care were in the direct interest of the United States and its foreign policy. American leadership and engagement abroad are essential to ensuring peace and prosperity remain at home, as the true purpose of foreign policy “has always been to defend the American way of life.”[7] Using policy to leverage development aid was a cost-effective way that the US was able to project influence, create and strengthen global alliances, assert its dominance among other superpowers, and mitigated threats before they needed expensive military intervention.
Current Situation
The current US policy on this issue is a total reversal of what it has been since the implementation of USAID by President John F. Kennedy. President Donald Trump’s second administration has made the decision to dismantle all of USAID’s functions completely; fueled by the thought that foreign aid is a wasteful expenditure to a country in a serious national debt and that it was being misused and administered in “woke” and “Marxist” ways.[8] Since February 2025 when it was closed, the agency’s headquarters have been completely closed, and thousands of works have been fired, bringing almost all USAID programs to a chaotic and abrupt ending.[9]
The immediate impact of USAID’s dissolution has been felt swiftly, and catastrophic results have been seen worldwide. Looking specifically at global health programs sponsored or funded by USAID, the termination of programs like GAVI, Vaccine Alliance, and PEPFAR is expected to cause a massive spike in preventable diseases and death.[10] One study done by a mathematician at Boston University calculated that millions could die within the next few years from the AIDS/HIV resurgence alone, but that close to 300,000 people have died already due to lack of medication or food.[11] These deaths and the backlash from the loss of these programs can not only be viewed as a moral failure from the US. However, they can also be viewed as a potential global security threat in the case of future pandemics.
At the same time, a humanitarian crisis is also unfolding. The US was the world’s largest humanitarian donor, and its absence is being felt. In active conflict zones, refugee camps, and other regions suffering from food insecurity or extreme poverty levels, the end of USAID programs is leading to increased sickness, starvation, and death.[12] Countries like Afghanistan, Ukraine, and countries across sub-Saharan Africa that depended on USAID for food aid and support are now facing horrific circumstances.[13] Anti-western sentiment is increasing as people in these countries are being forced to watch friends, family, and children suffer and die due to the removal of USAID programs, and global organizations like UNICEF or WHO have spoken out saying that such swift withdrawal is causing “irreparable damage to global humanitarianism.”[14]
Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy
The dissolution of USAID has led to some believing that this has shown that the US is voluntarily giving up the world stage they currently lead. Competitors like Russia and China are quickly stepping into the power vacuum left by USAID’s closure. They are expanding their own aid programs, which are often tied to resource extraction deals, political loyalty, or financial agreements leading to future debt leverage, and do not promote any semblance of democratic values or human rights beliefs.[15] By doing this, they are then able to build influence and create alliances and partnerships at the direct expense and loss of the US.
The US has virtually given up one of its most effective non-military tools that allowed it to help shape global events and create a world that was catered to its interests.[16] The United States’ ability to influence outcomes at the United Nations and other global forums has been weakened as developing nations no longer see the US as a reliable, credible, or trustworthy partner.[17] The perception of the US as global leader is now being shifted by the current administration to portray it as an unpredictable and isolationist country, which has hurt the nation’s diplomatic standing and soft power.[18] This erasure of influence compromises US national security by helping to create global instability which increases the likelihood of humanitarian disasters, mass migrations, refugee crises, and regional conflicts. History shows that conditions of instability often escalate into security threats, which inevitably require more expensive and extensive military response.
The US needs to respond immediately and reverse the decision made early in the Trump administration. The US should quickly establish an interim humanitarian and development fund that the US Department of State once again runs as a potential stop-gap measure. This could help to restore critical funding for life-saving programs. If this is set in place, this emergency program could help to signal to allies and competitors that the US is not stepping away from this field entirely and would help to mitigate the worst consequences while Congress works to help create a new long-term solution.
While Congress can be polarized in certain affairs, the creation of a new aid program is a chance to prove to the world that we do stand behind our beliefs and values, and that we understand the importance of the role we play in the world. American leadership cannot be built on military strength alone, but rather, it requires tools of all kinds, including soft power, to effectively lead the world toward a more liberal, democratized, republic.
Bibliography
[1] UAB Institute for Human Rights, “Impacts of Terminating USAID (United States Agency for International Development),” March 16, 2025.
[2] Reuters, “USAID Workers Say Goodbye to Headquarters as Trump Drastically Cuts Foreign Aid,” February 27, 2025.
[3] UAB Institute for Human Rights, “Impacts of Terminating USAID,” 2025.
[4] NPR, “USAID, The Trump Administration And Global Health,” Goats and Soda, February 26, 2025.
[5] Better World Campaign, “The Impact of Foreign Assistance Cuts,” accessed June 2, 2025.
[6] R. Margesson, “What is Happening to U.S. Humanitarian Assistance? Will the United States Continue to Save Lives?,” Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2025.
[7] Michael Lind, The American Way of Strategy: U.S. Foreign Policy and the American Way of Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 4.
[8] Foreign Policy, “USAID, Trump, Musk, Rubio, and the State Department,” February 5, 2025
[9] Reuters, “USAID Workers Say Goodbye,” 2025.
[10] Vox, “USAID, foreign aid, Trump, Rubio, cuts, Gavi, vaccines,” Future Perfect, February 2025.
[11] B. Bose, “Mathematician Tracks Deaths From USAID, Medicaid Cuts,” BU Today, 2025.
[12] PBS NewsHour, “The Potential National and Global Impact of USAID’s Closure,” 2025.
[13] NPR, “USAID, Trump, Musk: Ukraine, South Africa, Mexico, Colombia, India, Afghanistan, HIV,” Goats and Soda, February 11, 2025.
[14] Whole Whale, “Shocking Dissolution of USAID May Cause Irreparable Damage to Global Humanitarianism,” podcast, 2025.
[15] Global Policy Journal, “The Consequences and Implications for the International Development Assistance Sector of the Closure of USAID,” March 20, 2025.
[16] A. Zissimos, “Soft Power at a Crossroads: The Implications of USAID’s Closure,” Diplomacy.edu, 2025.
[17] United Nations, “USAID Cuts Weaken U.S. Influence at United Nations,” Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2025.
[18] FocusEconomics, “USAID Shutdown: What Does It Mean for the World?,”.