United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
Implemented by President John F. Kennedy in 1961; Suspended by President Donald J Trump in 2025
Disclaimer - This document is a research-based analysis of USAID’s suspension and related policy developments. The information presented is based on publicly available sources, government reports, media coverage, and expert analysis as of 2025. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, some details may evolve due to ongoing legal, political, and administrative changes. This report does not represent the official stance of any government entity, organization, or individual. Any references to specific events, funding allocations, or policy decisions should be independently verified. The views expressed in cited sources belong to their respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the document’s compiler. Readers are encouraged to conduct further research and consult primary sources when forming conclusions or making policy-related decisions.
Update: Since I drafted the post below, Michael Schellenberger’s BOMBSHELL: Exposes Shocking USAID and CIA Connections to Trump’s Impeachment
Hi friends,
The suspension of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) by the Trump administration in 2025 marks a historic turning point in U.S. foreign policy. This decision, driven by concerns over financial mismanagement, ideological bias, and national security risks, has sparked intense debate in both domestic and international spheres.
For decades, USAID has served as the primary instrument of American foreign aid, providing humanitarian relief, economic development, and governance support in countries worldwide. However, recent controversies have called into question the agency’s commitment to its original mission, raising concerns about its expanding political role and alleged ties to intelligence operations. Critics argue that USAID has deviated from its core purpose, using taxpayer dollars to fund social and ideological programs, opposition movements, and foreign political influence campaigns rather than strictly humanitarian initiatives.
My research delves into the evolution of USAID, its shift in priorities, and the factors that led to its suspension. Specifically:
The historical foundation of USAID, its mission, and how its role has expanded beyond humanitarian assistance.
The agency’s increasing involvement in social and ideological initiatives, including funding for progressive programs abroad that critics argue have no direct connection to U.S. national interests.
Evidence of USAID’s political influence operations, including its alleged role in funding opposition movements, influencing foreign media, and supporting legal institutions that critics claim serve as mechanisms for regime change.
Concerns over financial mismanagement, including reports of grants awarded to organizations with alleged ties to extremist groups and a lack of oversight in major funding allocations.
The geopolitical consequences of the suspension, including its impact on U.S. diplomacy, humanitarian aid, and global influence.
While supporters of the suspension view it as a necessary reform to prevent government waste, ideological overreach, and foreign interference, opponents argue that the decision weakens U.S. global leadership, undermines humanitarian efforts, and creates a power vacuum that could be exploited by adversarial nations such as China and Russia.
USAID’s suspension was part of a larger restructuring of U.S. foreign aid policy, not an isolated event.
Going forward, policymakers must weigh competing interests—balancing national security, financial accountability, and humanitarian obligations—to determine the best way forward for America. These decisions will continue to shape America for years to come.
Section 1: Introduction & Background
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has played a pivotal role in global humanitarian efforts since its establishment in 1961. Originally founded to promote economic development, disaster relief, and democracy-building worldwide, USAID has long been positioned as a cornerstone of American foreign policy.
This section provides an overview of:
The history and mission of USAID.
Key legislative acts shaping its development.
USAID’s structural and operational framework.
Its evolving role in global diplomacy.
The Historical Foundation of USAID
Established under President John F. Kennedy in 1961 through the Foreign Assistance Act.
Initially focused on economic development, infrastructure projects, and humanitarian relief.
Expanded to democracy promotion and governance programs in the post-Cold War era.
USAID’s Operational Framework
Works through grants, contracts, and partnerships with NGOs, foreign governments, and private enterprises.
Operates with independent decision-making but aligns with the State Department and National Security Council.
Annual budget allocations approved by Congress.
Shifting Role in Global Diplomacy
1990s-Present: Expansion into democracy promotion, gender equality, climate change initiatives, and social programs.
Increasing controversy over USAID’s role in foreign political affairs.
Debate over whether USAID remains a humanitarian agency or an instrument of geopolitical influence.
Conclusion
USAID was established to provide humanitarian aid and economic development assistance, but over time, its role has expanded significantly.
While it remains a key instrument of U.S. foreign policy, questions have arisen regarding its alignment with national interests and its impact on global diplomacy.
This transition has set the stage for growing concerns over mission creep, political influence, and financial accountability, leading to debates over its long-term viability.
Section 2: USAID’s Shift in Priorities
Over the past two decades, USAID has gradually shifted from a primarily humanitarian and economic development agency to a more politically active entity. Critics argue that this transition has led to mission creep, where the agency’s work extends beyond its original purpose into ideological and political arenas.
Expansion into Social and Ideological Programs
Increasing focus on gender identity, LGBTQ+ initiatives, and DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs.
Funding of progressive social initiatives in countries with strong cultural opposition.
Accusations of imposing Western social values on developing nations.
Foreign Political Involvement
Allegations of USAID funding opposition movements in Eastern Europe and Latin America.
Accusations of color revolution tactics, where USAID-backed groups challenge existing governments.
Specific examples of USAID grants supporting media, NGOs, and political organizations aligned with U.S. policy objectives.
Economic & Security Implications
Increased funding for climate change policies rather than immediate economic relief.
Reports of funding mismanagement and grants awarded to organizations with potential extremist ties.
National security concerns over USAID funding ending up in the hands of hostile actors.
So, we are here:
USAID’s evolving priorities have sparked concerns that the agency has strayed from its original mission.
Its involvement in social, ideological, and political movements has blurred the lines between aid and foreign intervention.
These concerns contributed to the scrutiny USAID faced leading up to its current suspension.
Section 3: Recent Controversies (2023-2025)
From 2023 to 2025, USAID continued to fund programs that critics argue extend beyond its stated humanitarian mission. Several instances raised concerns about ideological influence, political interference, and questionable funding allocations. This section highlights recent controversies that illustrate these concerns.
1. USAID’s Funding of Ideological and Social Programs
Colombia: $47,000 allocated for a transgender opera promoting LGBTQI+ themes.
Peru: $32,000 for a transgender comic book aimed at youth audiences.
Guatemala: Over $2 million dedicated to funding gender transition procedures and LGBT activism initiatives.
Critics argue that taxpayer dollars should not be used to advance social and ideological causes, particularly in foreign nations where such initiatives may not align with local cultural or political values.
2. USAID’s Questionable Grants to Organizations with Alleged Terrorist Links
Helping Hand for Relief and Development (HHRD) Grant – $110,000 (2021, Under Scrutiny in 2023)
USAID awarded a grant to HHRD, a Michigan-based charity, despite concerns raised by members of Congress and watchdog groups about its alleged ties to terrorist organizations.
Gaza Humanitarian Aid (2024) – Risk of Diverted Funds
USAID allocated significant aid to humanitarian projects in Gaza, where governance is controlled by Hamas. Watchdog reports warned that funds could be redirected to Hamas-affiliated entities, raising ethical and security concerns.
3. USAID’s Political and Judicial Influence in Foreign Nations
Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) received direct USAID funding, raising concerns that the agency was influencing legal proceedings in a sovereign nation.
4. USAID’s Role in Political Unrest and Opposition Movements
Eastern Europe: USAID increased funding to civil society groups and opposition parties, leading some governments to accuse the U.S. of using USAID to promote regime change under the guise of supporting democracy.
Hungary: USAID-funded independent media organizations were seen as an attempt to undermine the ruling government, which had clashed with U.S. foreign policy interests.
These controversies highlight a pattern of controversial allocations, and the concerns surrounding USAID’s funding decisions played a direct role in its eventual suspension in 2025.
Section 4: The 2025 Suspension of USAID by the Trump Administration
In early 2025, the Trump administration announced the suspension of USAID, citing concerns over financial mismanagement, ideological bias, and national security risks. The decision was part of a broader effort to realign U.S. foreign aid policies and address allegations that USAID had overstepped its humanitarian mission. This section details the reasons behind the suspension, key players involved, political reactions, and the immediate consequences of the decision.
1. Reasons for the Suspension
Political & Ideological Concerns
• The Trump administration accused USAID of advancing a progressive and globalist agenda rather than focusing on its core humanitarian objectives.
• Reports indicated that USAID funding had been directed toward social and ideological programs that critics argued were not in line with U.S. foreign policy interests.
• Allegations surfaced that USAID’s involvement in political movements abroad amounted to interference in sovereign nations' domestic affairs.
Financial Mismanagement & Funding Controversies
• High-profile investigations revealed questionable spending practices, including:
o Funding for ideological social programs (see Section 3 for examples).
o Lack of oversight in grants leading to fraud, abuse, and waste.
• The administration emphasized the need for greater accountability and suggested that taxpayer money should be redirected toward domestic priorities.
National Security Risks
• Intelligence reports highlighted the risk of USAID funds being diverted to terrorist-linked groups.
• Investigations into USAID’s grant processes raised concerns about its ability to vet organizations effectively.
• Specific cases, such as funding to groups operating in Gaza with potential Hamas affiliations, fueled calls for urgent action.
In conclusion, the suspension of USAID in 2025 was driven by concerns over financial mismanagement, ideological influence, and national security risks. The Trump administration argued that USAID had overstepped its humanitarian mission, becoming entangled in foreign political affairs and funding controversial programs. Critics, however, warned that the decision could have severe humanitarian and diplomatic consequences.
• Supporters of the suspension contend that eliminating USAID curbs government waste, prevents ideological interference, and enhances national security. They argue that aid should be restructured to serve direct U.S. interests rather than fund progressive social agendas abroad.
• Opponents warn that the move diminishes U.S. global influence, weakens international partnerships, and leaves vulnerable populations without crucial aid. They view it as an ideological attack on humanitarian efforts and anticipate long-term consequences for America’s soft power.
Whaever USAID’s future is, its suspension signals a major shift in U.S. foreign policy, potentially redefining America’s role in global development and humanitarian aid.
Section 5: Reactions & International Implications
The suspension of USAID in 2025 triggered widespread debate, both domestically and internationally. While some saw it as a necessary correction to U.S. foreign aid policy, others viewed it as a drastic and politically motivated move with significant humanitarian consequences. This section examines the reactions from political leaders, the public, foreign governments, and NGOs, as well as the broader implications for U.S. global influence.
1. Domestic Reactions
Political Responses in the U.S.
• Support
o Advocated for eliminating government waste and prioritizing domestic spending.
o Supported replacing USAID with a more America-first foreign aid approach.
• Opposition
o Argued that the move threatened humanitarian efforts and weakened U.S. global leadership.
o Proposed efforts to reinstate or replace key USAID functions.
The suspension of USAID in 2025 generated intense political, diplomatic, and economic reactions. While domestic supporters praised the decision as a necessary step toward accountability and national interest-driven foreign aid, critics warned of humanitarian crises and weakened U.S. influence abroad. Internationally, the response was mixed, with some nations adapting to the shift, while others criticized the abrupt withdrawal of American assistance.
• Supporters argue that USAID’s suspension eliminates wasteful spending, curtails ideological overreach, and refocuses aid on direct U.S. priorities. Many see this as an opportunity to restructure foreign assistance policies in a way that ensures more targeted and effective aid.
• Opponents contend that the move undermines U.S. credibility and diplomatic leverage, creating a vacuum that adversarial nations like China and Russia may exploit. The sudden withdrawal of aid has raised concerns about long-term instability in recipient nations.
The debate over USAID’s suspension is far from settled. The wole situation is in flux. There’s a lot more to learn.
Section 6: The Future of USAID & U.S. Foreign Aid Policy
With USAID suspended, the U.S. faces critical decisions on the future of foreign aid. This section examines possible policy directions, alternative aid models, and the long-term consequences for U.S. global influence. While some advocate for reinstating a reformed version of USAID, others support a complete overhaul of U.S. foreign aid policy to reduce government involvement and prioritize national interests.
1. Policy Alternatives
• Reforming USAID
o Some policymakers suggest reinstating USAID under stricter financial oversight, ensuring it does not fund political activism or ideological programs.
o Proposals include limiting USAID’s scope to strict humanitarian assistance, emergency response, and disaster relief.
• Replacing USAID with a New Aid Model
o Instead of a broad federal agency, some advocate for a network of smaller, mission-focused agencies with congressional oversight.
o Others propose a public-private partnership (PPP) model, where corporations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) take the lead in aid distribution.
• Shifting to Bilateral Aid Agreements
o The Trump administration has emphasized one-on-one aid agreements instead of multilateral, unrestricted foreign aid programs.
o This model allows the U.S. to negotiate directly with recipient countries and ensure aid aligns with U.S. strategic interests.
2. Strategic Shifts in U.S. Foreign Aid
• The suspension of USAID is part of a larger shift toward an “America First” foreign policy that prioritizes economic partnerships over open-ended aid commitments.
• The administration is exploring regional partnerships where aid is provided through allied nations rather than direct U.S. funding.
• Emphasis on national security-driven aid allocation, ensuring that funding does not reach adversarial regimes or extremist-linked organizations.
3. Political and Economic Considerations
• Domestic Impact
o The suspension of USAID has reduced taxpayer spending on foreign assistance, but some industries (e.g., contractors, NGOs) may face financial shortfalls.
o Congressional debates over whether some aspects of USAID should be restored or replaced with new funding mechanisms.
• International Response
o Some allied nations (e.g., EU, NATO members) have criticized the decision, fearing that U.S. disengagement will create power vacuums in unstable regions.
o China and Russia have capitalized on the void left by USAID, increasing their own influence in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East through economic incentives and infrastructure projects.
Conclusion
The suspension of USAID has reshaped U.S. foreign aid policy, reflecting a shift away from multilateral aid initiatives toward bilateral agreements and strategic funding priorities.
• Supporters contend that dismantling USAID is a necessary correction to end government overreach, eliminate wasteful spending, and ensure that aid aligns with U.S. national interests.
• Opponents argue that the move weakens American diplomatic influence, reduces humanitarian assistance, and allows adversarial nations to fill the void left by U.S. aid programs.
The future of U.S. foreign aid policy remains uncertain. As the U.S. redefines its role in international development and humanitarian responsibilities, it will be more efficient and effective in its mission.
Section 7: Final Analysis
Summary of Key Findings
• USAID’s historical role in global humanitarian efforts and how its mission evolved over time.
• Key controversies and concerns that led to increased scrutiny and, ultimately, the suspension of USAID.
• Economic, political, and security implications of the suspension, including its impact on diplomatic relations, global stability, and U.S. influence.
• Alignment with broader U.S. foreign policy trends, particularly the shift toward bilateral agreements, national security-driven aid, and reduced multilateral commitments.
Final Thoughts
As the U.S. recalibrates its foreign aid policy, the long-term effects of USAID’s suspension remain a subject of debate. While some hail the decision as a necessary shift toward self-reliance and national interest-driven aid, others express concerns over its diplomatic and humanitarian consequences.
• The suspension of USAID marks a turning point in U.S. foreign policy, emphasizing restructured global engagement and reduced reliance on traditional aid models.
• While some view the decision as a needed reform, others warn of diminished American influence in international development.
• Going forward, the U.S. must find a balanced approach between national interests and humanitarian responsibilities, ensuring that foreign aid is used effectively without compromising sovereignty or security.
• The broader significance of foreign aid in U.S. policy will continue to evolve, with future administrations likely reassessing the role of development assistance in diplomacy.
Conclusion
The suspension of USAID represents a major shift in U.S. foreign aid strategy and carries significant ramifications for international relations, economic stability, and geopolitical influence.
• The move has sparked divergent reactions domestically and globally, reflecting a broader debate over the government’s role in international development.
• While some nations and organizations will seek alternative funding sources, the long-term impact on humanitarian aid and global alliances remains uncertain.
• Ultimately, the future of U.S. foreign aid will depend on evolving domestic policies, congressional actions, and the strategic priorities of future administrations.
Sources and resources referenced throughout this article, covering USAID’s controversies, mission drift, and alleged intelligence connections
Additional References and Sources:
Secretary of State Rubio Confirms He’s Now Acting USAID Chief.
Rubio’s remarks were made amid speculation about the agency’s future.
“USAID is not functioning. It has to be aligned with US policy. It needs to be aligned with the national interest of the U.S.,” Rubio said. “They’re not a global charity—these are taxpayer dollars. People are asking simple questions. What are they doing with the money? We are spending taxpayers money. We owe the taxpayers assurances that it furthers our national interest.”
Though opponents say otherwise, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “Again, people who are receiving individual assistance ... will continue to receive that,”
USAID’s History Of Regime Change, Destabilization, And Censorship Justifies Its Closure By Trump: The agency was a key part of unaccountable deep state and imperialistic foreign policy “blob”.
Excerpt: [T]here was nothing illegal, unethical, or inappropriate about DOGE’s takeover of USAID, and nobody has presented any evidence that it threatens national security. The American people elected Trump who appointed Musk to oversee DOGE, as Trump has a right to do.
"For decades, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been unaccountable to taxpayers as it funnels massive sums of money to the ridiculous — and, in many cases, malicious — pet projects of entrenched bureaucrats, with next-to-no oversight," the White House said Monday.
At the top of the list was a $1.5 million program slated to "advance diversity, equity and inclusion in Serbia's workplaces and business communities"
Rubio took issue with the protests and referred to them as "rank insubordination."
"The goal was to reform it, but now we have rank insubordination," he said. "Now we have basically an active effort — their basic attitude is, ‘We don’t work for anyone. We work for ourselves. No agency of government can tell us what to do.’"
USAID Lavished U.S. Cash on Hamas-Run Gaza
DOGE is bringing 'sunlight to the swamp,' says William La Jeunesse
11 Insane Things Your Tax Dollars Paid For Thanks To USAID
Books on USAID corruption:
"Masters of Corruption: How the Federal Bureaucracy Sabotaged the Trump Presidency" by Mark Moyar (2024): This book provides an insider's perspective on the federal bureaucracy, including USAID, detailing how career federal employees allegedly thwarted President Trump's efforts to reform various agencies. amazon.com
"Collision and Collusion: The Strange Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe" by Janine R. Wedel (2001): Anthropologist Janine Wedel examines how Western aid, including that from USAID, was mismanaged in Eastern Europe after the Cold War, leading to unintended consequences and corruption.
"Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by John Perkins (2004): Perkins discusses his role in convincing developing countries to accept substantial development loans, which benefited U.S. corporations and were often facilitated through organizations like USAID. en.wikipedia.org
"The Road to Hell: The Ravaging Effects of Foreign Aid and International Charity" by Michael Maren (1997): Maren critiques the international aid industry, including USAID, arguing that aid efforts in Africa often led to more harm than good due to mismanagement and corruption. en.wikipedia.org
"Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends" by Peter Schweizer (2018): Schweizer explores how political figures use organizations like USAID to channel funds and favors, leading to allegations of corruption. amazon.com
"How Haiti Became an Aid State" by Jake Johnston (2024): Johnston provides an analysis of how aid organizations, including USAID, have operated in Haiti, highlighting issues of counterproductivity and corruption. foreignpolicy.com
My two cents:
After reading, do you think something in rotten in USAID?Perhaps this is not an accident or an occasional lapse, but a concerted, hidden effort to meddle and control using your tax dollars. Some say USAID is a tool of the CIA. A case could certainly be made that the mission is a disguise and the actions are the real mission.
God bless you, God bless President Trump and team, and God bless America!
Stay calm - President Trump is a businessman who operates strategically, and not everything will make sense at first. His plan to shrink government and Make America Great Again is a process, not an overnight fix. Trust the long game, not just the headlines.
This message reflects my personal perspective on current events. While I strive for accuracy, please verify details through official sources linked above. If sharing, I encourage readers to include this disclaimer to ensure clarity.
United we stand. Divided we fall. We must not let America fall.
VoteTexas.gov, https://www.votetexas.gov/get-involved/index.html
Until next time…
Please share your thoughts in the comments. Or email me, and let’s have a problem-solving conversation. I welcome ‘letters to the editor’ type emails and may publish yours. I hope we can create a caucus with positive, back-to-the-founders’-dream-for-America results. Have a topic you want to know more about?
Some housekeeping…
Going forward, you may need to check your spam folder. And please mark this address as ‘not spam.’ If the newsletter isn’t in your spam folder either, you should look in the Promotions tab.
You can always see everything on the website, RationalAmerican.org.
Thanks again for reading! I’m glad you’re here!