1. Trump’s Crackdown on USAID Spending
President Donald Trump introduced a freeze on foreign aid funded through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) as part of his efforts to reduce what he viewed as wasteful government spending. This move was also aligned with his broader America First agenda. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was tasked with ensuring that U.S. overseas assistance programs reflected the country’s national interests. Rubio, emphasizing that taxpayer dollars should not fund far-left causes, described USAID as a “global charity,” questioning its spending practices and priorities.
2. USAID’s Questionable Expenditures
USAID’s funding was scrutinized for supporting numerous projects that critics argue were misaligned with U.S. interests. Among the questionable projects highlighted was a $2 million initiative supporting transgender healthcare in Guatemala, aimed at funding “gender-affirming health care” for trans individuals. Further investigations revealed that USAID also allocated substantial amounts of money to a wide range of LGBTQ+ causes and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs globally, including funding initiatives in Africa, Central America, and the Caribbean. These projects raised concerns about the appropriateness of using taxpayer funds for social advocacy initiatives rather than addressing more urgent issues like economic development or humanitarian aid.
3. Wasteful Spending and Political Agenda
USAID’s expenditures included funding for LGBTQ+ projects across the globe, such as supporting LGBTQ+ employment initiatives in Serbia and producing transgender operas in Colombia. There were also numerous programs supporting LGBTQ+ advocacy in countries like Albania and Peru, along with funds allocated to promote gender equality and climate activism. Critics, including Rep. Brian Mast, condemned these efforts as excessive, pointing out the millions of dollars spent on cultural and identity-based programs that did not necessarily align with U.S. foreign policy goals or the needs of the populations they were meant to assist.
4. USAID’s Focus on Climate Change and Social Issues
In addition to LGBTQ+ projects, USAID funded several climate change and social justice programs. These included efforts to help women in northern Kenya adapt to climate change and promoting disability-inclusive climate action in Tajikistan. Critics argued that USAID’s focus on equity, diversity, and inclusion sometimes overshadowed more immediate concerns, such as economic aid or disaster relief. A significant portion of their work was framed within their climate strategy, with a $150 billion initiative set to address climate change while elevating gender and disability issues in the context of global environmental policy.
5. Corruption and Support for Terrorism
USAID was also implicated in funding projects that indirectly supported terrorism or were linked to terrorist organizations. For instance, al Qaeda-linked groups in Syria allegedly received aid meant for refugees, and some Afghan poppy cultivation programs funded by USAID were found to inadvertently support Taliban activities. In another case, Islamic Relief Worldwide, an organization with ties to Hamas, received USAID grants, raising concerns about U.S. taxpayer funds being funneled to groups sympathetic to terrorism. Reports also indicated that USAID funds went to organizations in Gaza that were associated with Hamas, including the Bayader for Environment and Development Association.
6. USAID’s Partnerships with Controversial Organizations
USAID continued to face controversy over its connections with entities like the EcoHealth Alliance, which was involved in research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Despite no evidence that USAID directly funded gain-of-function research, the partnership drew attention due to EcoHealth’s involvement in risky pandemic research. Moreover, USAID funded Cuban-linked organizations like the Overseas Cooperative Development Council, whose leadership included the daughter of a former Cuban intelligence official. These ties raised concerns about the potential misuse of U.S. funds in promoting foreign political agendas instead of advancing U.S. interests abroad.
The Trump administration’s freeze on USAID spending aimed to address these issues by cutting foreign assistance seen as politically motivated or wasteful. Despite the freeze, some USAID staff pushed for waivers, but Marco Rubio’s State Department rejected many requests, signaling a tighter control over U.S. foreign aid moving forward.
