How Trump’s Attack on USAID Undermines American Leadership and Security

Since his first day in office, President Donald Trump and a cohort of unelected billionaires and political appointees have set their sights on dismantling U.S. foreign aid. In an egregious move on Monday, Elon Musk declared that Trump agreed to “shut down” the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), with the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) overseeing the transition. USAID employees received notice that the agency’s Washington, D.C., headquarters had been abruptly shuttered; by the end of the day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that he would act as administrator of the agency, with Peter Marocco, who allegedly participated in the January 6 insurrection, serving as deputy administrator. Musk’s DOGE team has already placed senior USAID officials on leave, suspended security personnel who refused to allow access to classified materials, and gained access to sensitive government data.

The forced takeover comes after two weeks of attacks on foreign aid. On January 20, President Trump signed an executive order freezing nearly all U.S. foreign assistance for 90 days, claiming a need to reassess taxpayer dollars spent abroad. Days later, Secretary Rubio issued further guidance that forced U.S. officials to issue “stop work” orders to contractors, nongovernmental organizations, and aid groups; in response to strong opposition, Secretary Rubio later issued a waiver for core “life-saving” humanitarian needs, but its scope remains ambiguous.

In total, the Trump administration’s actions the past two weeks have caused unnecessary chaos and disruptions across the world. U.N. agencies, international relief organizations, and U.S. aid groups are scrambling to assess and mitigate the damage to lifesaving programs and more. While some of the administration’s efforts are already facing legal challenges and strong pushback from members of Congress—several of whom were denied access to USAID headquarters this week—these actions have real and lasting consequences for Americans and people around the world.

Trump’s attacks on aid are not about cutting waste or making the government more efficient; they’re about using blunt force to fulfill Project 2025’s pledges to put to death U.S. foreign assistance spending and “serve the President’s agenda.” The moves are in line with Elon Musk’s efforts to target and overturn disfavored policy priorities by expelling scientists, engineers, and health specialists and by slashing associated spending to make space for tax cuts for the ultrarich. On Monday, Musk tweeted that he “spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper.” But slashing the U.S. foreign assistance budget is a textbook example of penny-wise, pound-foolish. In fiscal year 2023, USAID managed a budget of $43 billion, comprising about 0.7 percent of the total U.S. budget. Extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, by comparison, would represent the equivalent of more than nine USAIDs each year: $400 billion in costs that would disproportionately benefit the ultrawealthy.

It is appropriate for the administration to review programs for efficiency. But it is both potentially illegal and an act of incompetence to freeze nearly all programs while undertaking such a review. Trump’s foreign aid freeze puts Americans and vulnerable populations in danger of disease, conflict and transnational crime while ceding overseas influence to China and Russia.

Causing costly chaos

Unlike previous administrations, which have temporarily paused specific programs for an efficiency review, the Trump administration’s foreign aid freeze is both sweeping and indiscriminate. In 2014, for instance, the Obama administration paused funding for new research on influenza, SARS, and MERS to assess the risks and benefits of any new policy.

The broad range of U.S. foreign assistance programs—from lifesaving global health programs to alliance-building security partnerships—represent cost-effective ways to ensure global safety, security, and stability that do not require the United States to send troops into war. Foreign aid accounts for just 1 percent of the federal budget, and by disrupting it, the administration invites costly litigation and job loss throughout the foreign assistance sector.

Despite Secretary Rubio’s waiver for humanitarian aid, disruptions to foreign aid have already led to operational challenges for numerous humanitarian organizations, forcing many U.S.-funded aid programs worldwide to shutter on-the-ground activities and begin laying off staff. Amid the sudden halt in funding, organizations and contractors are scrambling for alternative resources, but the scale and abruptness of the decision makes this task near impossible.

Exacerbating complex crises

The United States is the world’s largest humanitarian donor, providing $68 billion in foreign assistance in 2023—nearly a third of global aid of global aid—through many highly effective and roundly applauded programs.

Take the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), for example. For two decades, it has been the backbone of global HIV/AIDS relief, reducing AIDS-related deaths by 68 percent worldwide and reinforcing health systems that combat pandemics. Yet while February 1 guidance allowed some PEPFAR activities to resume, others—including abortion and family planning services, gender and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, and conferences—remain on pause. Clinics have already turned patients away, and data systems that track infections and treatment adherence have gone dark. Such interruptions in care increase the risk of drug resistance and new infections. The uncertainty alone destabilizes fragile health systems that rely on U.S. support, putting more than 25 million lives—including 500,000 children—at risk.

This self-inflicted unreliability around U.S. aid comes at a time of unprecedented crisis globally. One in 11 people worldwide faced hunger in 2023—152 million more people than in 2019—with conflicts in Sudan and Gaza pushing millions toward famine. At the same time, climate disasters are accelerating: Nearly 4,000 extreme weather events resulted in economic losses reaching $451 billion throughout 2022 and 2023. In 2023 alone, 26.4 million people were displaced by climate-driven disasters, further destabilizing fragile states. Meanwhile, global health threats are resurging: Malaria deaths are climbing due to funding shortfalls, and dengue fever has become a year-round crisis in Latin America and Southeast Asia.

These crises do not happen in a vacuum. When food shortages drive mass displacement, climate shocks undermine governments, and pandemics go unchecked, the consequences cost lives and disrupt livelihoods all around the world—and they hit home in the United States through supply chain disruptions, migration pressures, and new security threats.

Undermining global security efforts

The attacks on aid have also created distrust and uncertainty among partners and allies that the United States depends on to maintain global security. Trump has paused programs that strengthen the capabilities of partner nations, deter adversaries, and reduce the need for direct military intervention. While Secretary Rubio’s January 24 memo stipulated that military aid to Israel and Egypt would continue—despite concerns over human rights abuses—all other programs are in limbo. In particular, the status of assistance to Ukraine, critical to sustaining Kyiv’s war effort against Russia, remains ambiguous. Military assistance to Taiwan, which relies on U.S. training and equipment to deter Chinese aggression, has also been thrown into uncertainty.

Moreover, Trump’s aid freeze is hindering security initiatives that serve U.S. strategic interests. In Haiti, it’s disrupting the Kenyan-led U.N. security mission at a critical moment, leaving police without the training and intelligence needed to counter gangs tightening their grip on the capital. U.S. security assistance has, likewise, been the backbone of counterterrorism efforts in East Africa, where Interpol just arrested 37 suspected extremists across the region; on February 1, the U.S. Africa Command carried out strikes on al-Shabab, a terror group that continues to exploit weak security and political instability in Somalia. But with the Trump administration’s aid freeze and stop-work order, many anti-terrorism and stabilization efforts are now in limbo. The same freeze is unraveling counter-narcotics and anti-human trafficking operations that prevent cross-border crime before it starts.

Ceding global leadership

Nothing kills trust like abruptly halting equipment, training commitments, and funding. Foreign governments that count on U.S. assistance now see their agreements suddenly upended by a political decision in Washington. Such harmful actions are “own goals,” both undermining trust and partnership with recipient countries and sending a clear message of unreliability and untrustworthiness around the world. This weakens U.S. global power—not just the so-called “soft power” of foreign assistance but also the required foundation of trust, durability, and respect to rally foreign partners’ support and action when it comes time to achieve U.S. goals. These include competing with China; combating transnational threats such as climate change, narcotics trade, and pandemic disease; and addressing the next global macroeconomic crisis.

China has remained a constant presence, steadily expanding its influence around the world. For instance, between 2013 and 2021, Beijing invested $679 billion in global infrastructure—nearly nine times the $76 billion the United States provided during the same period. In September 2024, President Xi Jinping pledged nearly $51 billion in new financing for Africa focused on job creation, trade, and industrial partnerships. China has also surpassed the United States as the leading trade partner for many Latin American nations, deepening economic ties through infrastructure projects and energy investments. While Washington reassesses its commitments, China is pressing ahead with long-term strategic investments that deepen its economic and political foothold.

To be clear, many of China’s investments in global health, climate, disaster relief, and science benefit people the world over, Americans included. And in these areas, the United States should seek to collaborate, not retreat. Unfortunately, the recent aid freeze undermines U.S. global leadership in areas of competition and collaboration alike.

Attacking the balance of powers

By suspending congressionally appropriated funds, the Trump administration has likely broken various appropriations and authorization laws as well as the Impoundment Control Act (ICA) of 1974. For one, the freeze would cause the United States to violate its contracts by calling for a halt to payments that have already been obligated. Furthermore, Trump’s executive order states “no further United States foreign assistance shall be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the President of the United States.” While Section 1013 of the ICA grants the president the power to defer new obligations, the president must fulfill two legal obligations to do so: 1) submit a specific message to Congress and 2) provide one of three justifiable reasons for pause. President Trump did neither.

This is not the first time Trump has tested the limits of his authority to withhold funds. In 2019, Trump notoriously froze military assistance to Ukraine. He justified the illegal pause as necessary for “interagency review,” but over time, his intent became clear: to pressure Ukraine to intervene on his behalf in the 2020 election. By 2020, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruled that the Trump administration had violated federal law, noting: “The ICA does not permit deferrals for policy reasons.”

The foreign assistance freeze sends a dangerous signal that the Trump administration sees spending laws as voluntary and that the president may choose to ignore them on a whim. Additionally, Trump and his pick to lead the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, have been explicit about the intent behind impounding taxpayer funds: They seek to wrest power from Congress and centralize it in the executive branch, undercutting constitutional checks and balances. In this light, the attacks on foreign aid are not just harmful for U.S. standing and global stability but for the rule of law and American democracy as well.

Conclusion

If Washington wants to remain a global leader, it needs to act like one. This is a moment for President Trump to lead strategically and not tactically—and explicitly not to discard a key lever of U.S. power to find a way to pay for tax cuts for wealthy donors. Fixing what’s broken in foreign assistance is part of the mission, but walking away from the table is a consequential mistake. Strategic international engagement centered on diplomacy, defense, and development is the right and smart thing to do for the United States.

The administration must recommit to the independence of USAID, reopen its headquarters, and reinstate funding for all assistance activities while undertaking any efficiency reviews. When aid stops, America doesn’t just lose influence; it costs lives, forfeits credibility, and jeopardizes national security. And that’s a cost Americans cannot afford.